Tuesday News: Limits of Kindle Unlimited, the future of the book, Jacqueline Woodson on the watermelon joke, and Booklist’s top ten 2014 romances
Publishing NewsAmazon / digital books / History / Kindle Unlimited / publishing / Race / Self-publishing / top ten lists79 Comments
Author Discontent Grows As Kindle Unlimited Enters Its Fifth Month – Nate Hoffelder looks at HM Ward’s withdrawal from Kindle Unlimited as a signal that the program may not be delivering value for authors. Ward claimed that her “sales dropped like a stone,” including for books not in Kindle Unlimited. Hoffelder further speculates:
Speaking of watching, while looking into this story I noted what looks like the beginning of a worrisome trend. There are authors whose works weren’t in KU who are reporting that their incomes had dipped since it launched, almost as if readers were spending so much time reading the ebooks in KU that they stopped buying ebooks. With 750,000 titles, KU could be displacing ebook sales.–The Digital Reader
THE FUTURE OF THE BOOK — Catching up on some older stories, this piece from The Economist is actually pretty good (yes, that’s surprise you “hear”). The piece traces the history of books and reading and uses it as a reflection for today’s changing reality, and does so in a way that treats self-publishing, traditional publishing, and the rise of digital books with equanimity.
Publishers realise that they have to change. “Publishers will only be relevant if they can give authors evidence that they can connect their works to more readers than anybody else,” admits Markus Dohle, who runs Penguin Random House, the world’s largest consumer-book publisher.
Such connection is crucial, because the same technology that is making it easier for people to publish their own books is also making it easier for them to explore new ways of finding, sharing, discussing and indeed emulating the books of others. (Ms James’s “Fifty Shades of Grey” started off as fan-fiction based on the characters of Stephenie Meyer’s bestselling “Twilight” books.) From online reviews to the world’s numerous literary festivals to all sorts of social media, writers are ever more aware of and available to their audiences. Ms Orlean says she was used to “writing into the void”, but now posts regularly about what she is working on. For her and others the contact seems like an opportunity. Others find it irksome. Most, probably, see it as a bit of both. But it is not going away. And it is not entirely new. — The Economist
The Pain of the Watermelon Joke — It took me a few days to get this post together because I wanted to find a good essay on US postracialism, which is one of the things Woodson is talking about in her very poignant response to Daniel Handler’s racist joke. It had to have been difficult to write this post about a friend, but Woodson does not shy away from the offense of Handler’s words. The value of a book like Brown Girl Dreaming is even more relevant in an environment where people believe that racism is no longer so prevalent, a belief we often see among college-age students who may not have strong historical training in the history of race and race relations in the US. Rinku Sen, publisher of ColorLines, has a great essay on postracialism (the original site is no longer there, so this is a cached version) in which she distinguishes between interpersonal racism and structural racism, and talks about how structural racism has grown, even as interpersonal racism seems to be diminishing, creating the false impression that we have moved beyond race as a divisive category. It’s that phenomenon I think Woodson is referring to here:
In a few short words, the audience and I were asked to take a step back from everything I’ve ever written, a step back from the power and meaning of the National Book Award, lest we forget, lest I forget, where I came from. By making light of that deep and troubled history, he showed that he believed we were at a point where we could laugh about it all. His historical context, unlike my own, came from a place of ignorance. — The New York Times
Top 10 Romance Fiction: 2014 — Booklist, the American Library Association’s review site, posted its list of the top ten Romance novels for 2014. Notice any themes in that list? — Booklist
When I saw the link for the top romance books of 2014 I got all excited. When I saw that the newest SEP book – with the creepy puppets – made the list, I got all unexcited.
Aw, I love you guys for not respecting The Economist. (Everything else aside, their book recs usually suck. Also, they were bullish on Southern Europe.)
Some authors have said they’re doing really well with KU, others not so much. I don’t want to put all my eggs in one basket to find out.
Is here any info on how Scribd-available authors feel about Scribd? I must say I am thoroughly enjoying the books on Scribed (nonaudio, that is, as the audio book feature has really disappointed me) and I am seriously thinking about signing on after my free trial (thanks, DA) is over.
I was going to do a free trial of KU and see which I got the most bang for.
And yes, I have bought authors after “finding” them on Scribd.
I hope someone can explain why and how watermelons are racist in the context of African Americans. Watermelons are a tasty fruit. That others (including members of a particular group) find them tasty is no surprise. Would it be racist/sexist/agist if middle-aged, female, romance-readers were associated with liking watermelons? How does it differ from the maiden aunt drinking tea?
I’m not trolling, I just don’t get it.
@SAO; google “racist watermelon images” and you’ll understand.
@SAO: They’ve been used as part of a racist stereotype since the 19thC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermelon_stereotype
@SAO: This is good too: http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/question/may08/
@SAO:
The links listed by Isobel Carr and Sunita should get you started. And yes, watermelons are tasty. But there’s a sad history regarding how food and other products have been used to mock certain groups.
During slavery and segregation US advertisers promoted products using caricatures that negatively exaggerated the features and dialect of those considered “different”. Asians were caricatured (Riceland Rice comes to mind) and also Native Americans. What they added with African Americans were caricatures on body type (ads usually depicted large women – Aunt Jemima pancake mix comes to mind) and also darkened skin. Kitchen figurines and lawn jockeys sold with blackened skin, large red lips and white eyes. Some of these products can still be found doing a Google search.
No matter what country you’re from, chances are there will be a caricature of someone black either selling a product or the star of a product (Three Golliwogs book – England) even the ones that some may consider tradition (Black Peter-Netherlands, Memin Pinguin comic – Mexico)
Much like watermelons were used in the US for mockery, another food that was and still is used in a stereotypical manner is fried chicken. Golfers Fuzzy Zoeller and Sergio Garcia made jokes directed at Tiger Woods regarding fried chicken, and both ending up apologizing.
Bananas were and still are also used by some to denote blacks being likened to a primate.
It’s just something to keep in mind, but as long as you’re not closely linking the character’s ethnicity to foods just to mock, you should be okay.
I go a little farther than wikkidsexycool on food. I don’t think that a white person (and I am one) should ever comment on watermelon, bananas or any form of primate around African-Americans. Ever. Therein lies the Daniel Handler pit. He thought he was okay – he thought he was making some post-racial joke and showing how well he knew Woodson, etc. – he was wrong. Read her piece in the NY Times. My 5th grader’s social studies teacher has just included it in their unit and they’re reading it today.
I think it’s extremely difficult for whites to understand where something we think is inoffensive or innocent – we didn’t mean anything by it – our mouth was just talking – we truly just meant to say “wow that’s a huge watermelon!” about something at the store – we just have no idea how it’s going to be heard by the listener. We say “that’s a huge watermelon, isn’t it?” to someone standing in the produce section, and she hears “you big fat black lady, you must need a melon that big for all your kids, blah blah blah knife to the heart/frozen in the aisle because she didn’t really hear that did she?” – which isn’t what we thought, or what we intended or even considered, but it’s what culture has caused so many people to hear. Sure, some people don’t hear that – but some do, and I can’t predict or know the life experiences of someone else. I don’t need to go there.
It’s painfully obvious that watermelon, bananas and primates are memes used to bash American blacks. Look at how crazies make pictures of President Obama with all those memes. They’re disgusting. Those are seared in black people’s brains, but I bet most white people don’t even see them at all – they don’t register to us – but they must just burn like all the “good rape” comments make me ill. Fifteen years later, I sometimes still shake over the child abuse pictures I had to see practicing law – so I can’t imagine how a lifetime of shit like monkey jokes causes an immediate reaction when it comes up unexpectedly.
I think it’s just wise to not mention those things at all – because I know people are hurt by those stereotypes, and my innocent intention is not really explainable after the fact, and there are a hundred other things to say, aren’t there? I can say “wow, the apples are expensive today” when I’m in the produce section chatting with a stranger, and I just won’t hurt anyone’s feelings. I don’t NEED to exercise my right to talk about watermelon when I know it is a trigger and meme for racist comments.
So I fall on the side of never mentioning watermelon. I can self-edit … just courtesy. It doesn’t take any effort and it’s just polite.
Regarding the watermelon-racism thing, the problem with many of these issues is that some of us are unaware of them, for legitimate reasons. I moved to the US in December 1996, and the first time I was made aware of the racist connotations of watermelon was just a few months ago. Obviously, now that I know, I self-censor as well, but I am neither shocked nor angered that someone may need to ask what the reason for the reaction actually is.
YMMV and all that.
I agree with azteclady – I moved to US in 1997. Untill today I had no idea about racist connotations of watermelon. Of course I do not want to make racist jokes, racist comparisons, say anything racist, so I have to eradicate my ignorance in those areas if I discover I have it, no? And for that I have to ask sometimes unfortunately :(. And before you ask, I try very very hard to fill “cultural gaps” I have in many many many areas. But the thing is I would never be able to do it 100%. I came here when I was in my early twenties and various areas of history, literature, language, politics I had to catch up on (as all immigrants do I am sure) were so many :(. So once again, I totally get that it maybe painful to answer, but I really appreciate when people do.
@wikkidsexycool: actually, no, that’s not true. I have never seen the caricature of black person selling a product growing up. Of course the only black people I saw growing up were foreign students coming to study in various colleges of Soviet Union.
@ Ann, using your analogy, I as an Irish person should be offended if I overhear (a person in the grocery store) complain about the inferior quality of potatoes? I should then assume I am inferior, for being what? Irish? Poor? likening potatoes? I can tell you I grew up both, and Catholic to boot. I can only send thanks to whatever powers that be that my parents decided to move to Canada–though I hate the six months of -40 degree winter-weather–instead of the upper state New York, where they had both immigrated to in the early 50s and then married. They moved back to Ireland only to immigrant to Canada in the 70s. If now, at my age of 50, I have to be looking over my shoulder when I mention how expensive/crappy fruit is (Kiwi, for example is terribly pricey here, does that mean I hate Australians for the price of kiwis?)–lest I offend someone–that is the day I hide in a cave. I also happen to like/cook a varied menu of ethnic food-and when I go grocery shopping for ingredients, if I complain/complement, it about quality, not a racial comment. Sometimes a comment is what it is. No racial connation whatsoever intended. But those with an agenda (anti-gay, anti-smoking, or whatever special interest group, who happen to be within ear-shot) will always hear the negative in an innocent comment, and jump to point fingers. Just because I am white does not equate to being racist, if IF, I happen to make a comment about bok choy, kiwis or watermelons in the produce section.
I don’t think that the answer is to self-censor – unless you are of the unfortunate habit of saying insulting things on a regular but unmeaning basis.
The answer is to understand that some things aren’t really a “joke” and that we all do not have the same sense of humor. I wouldn’t make a casual joke about poor Irish people or Irish people and potatoes and the reason I wouldn’t make that joke is because it’s only a “joke” if you know the history behind the stigma. At which point you KNOW you are making a joke about stereotypes.
So people making black people and watermelon comments are fully aware of what they are saying – which is totally different from asking about watermelon prices in the grocery store aisle.
@Anna Richland:
Handler may have been making a joke that he thought related that he and Woodson were friends, but he clearly understood the implications of his “joke”. A comment like that might have gotten a raised eyebrow if they were alone, but to do it in front of an audience is what showed his real lack of sensitivity or common sense. (For myself, among my own closest friends, a comment like that would probably get a rude gesture and a statement of similar intent, but a casual acquaintance would get told all about themselves.)
You should do what feels most comfortable for you, for sure, but remarking on a watermelon in the grocery story isn’t really the issue here (although if the watermelon in question was in the actual hands of an actual black person, it would probably be best to self-censor). I’m all about understanding how our words affect others and consciously choosing what we say and how and to whom, but for stuff like this, context matters a lot.
@Sirius:
That’s why I stated “during slavery and segregation” at the start of my response to SAO.
Stereotypes get imported to other countries all the time, whether its an American product re-fashioned for that particular country, or a movie consisting of stereotypes (Birth of a Nation – which as black legislators eating fried chicken, among other stereotypes)
However, more recently, someone in Russia came out with Obama ice cream. Here’s the motto: From the motherland, Obama ice cream with the slogan “Everyone’s talking about it: dark inside white!”
I’m not going to post the link to the laser light show where someone in Russia has Obama eating a banana.
@wikkidsexycool: Yes I have heard about that “joke” on TV. I do not understand though how they could be compared in terms of how difficult it is to grasp for somebody who has no knowledge of stereotyping. The racism of “Obama ice cream” is more than obvious to me. I also REALLY despise Putin’s Russia just to be clear. I grew up with Russian culture , but I am a Jewish person from Ukraine so it is not like I would be defending the jokes they make even if they were not racist.
That should read “no knowledge of stereotyping with certain foods”.
Hey all, Re: the Top 10 Romance books. IS there a trend among those 10 books? Was that a rhetorical question? Because I didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary. There was a historical, a paranormal, a contemp, a few sexy looking ones, a few sweetish looking ones. What am I missing? (<– not snark. I feel like I'm missing something.)
@anon:
It’s not the same thing. If someone decides to intentionally or unintentionally link items that were historically used to ridicule and put down another culture, whether it’s potatoes or watermelon, they could be taken to task.
Also, what may offend one person may not offend another. I have run into kids and adults who didn’t know things they were saying were offensive and were rooted in history, so I consider it a teachable moment. For example, some people use the tern “off the reservation” without knowing that its a saying that’s derogatory to Native Americans.
Daniel Handler was aware of the historic connotation of his words. I’m sure he feels badly about it now. especially after he was told that his joke did not go over well. That’s part of the issue also, that he felt comfortable to tell the joke at a public event, and that it marred and otherwise celebratory event for his “good friend.”
@ MrsJoseph…my post was in response Anna Richland’s comment, which infers that a person remarking on the price/size of a watermelon IS BEING interpreted as being a racial slur. “…she hears “you big fat black lady, you must need a melon that big for all your kids, blah blah blah.”
Again, anyone with an agenda can read/misconstrue anything overheard.
I am in no way saying racism–race, religious, sexual orientation– does not exist. It does. I do not condone it, never have–never will.
But what I am seeing lately, in romance sites/conferences and associated blogs, is that I have to apologise for being white. Which I wont do. Neither will I curb my comments about fruit/vegetable–watermelons, bananas, bok choy, or whatever, which I pay from my pocket book–when I shop for them, if non-white person happens to around me, IF and when I complain about the quality of produce to the produce department. What’s next…I have to defend my choice to meat/seafood. Cant imagine what it would be like if a vegetarian overheard me complain to the manager of the meat department about the selection and quality of meat. Good gracious…where does it stop?
Again, a person with a grievance will always see the negative. I see it all the time in reviews/discussions of romance.
@Sirius:
I don’t disagree with you. These days its best to have a world view and to realize that things which translate one way in the US may be different elsewhere.
For example, in doing research for a novel, I wanted to know why there was a push to stay out of the sun in some countries. I soon learned that it had to do more with class and not skin color, as those lighter in complexion were thought to be more prosperous in that they didn’t have to work in the fields. The sun and manual labor outside equaled getting darker skin, so light skin’s coveted.
That’s not to say its the only reason, but that’s but one example.
@wikkidsexycool: Sure, of course, I do not disagree either. I just want to say that my initial comment was intended to be even more narrow than that. I am just not in agreement with not even being allowed to ask what was wrong with what I said if somebody took offense, you know? Yes, black person does not have any obligation to explain to me what connotations watermellon had (I keep wanting to say that even banana comparison is more obvious to me in its awfulness than watermellon was), just as I for example have no obligation to teach you (generic you) why certain words and comments have very specific antisemitic connotations for many Jews from former Soviet Union and what you (generic you) may have said (not anywhere here, I am just bringing a hypothetical) can be accidentally offensive to people of my ethnicity. The thing is though, I will *always* answer if somebody is genuinely confused, ALWAYS, that is why I never understood the hostile responses to the desire to eliminate ignorance and not to be accidentally offensive. Nobody has an obligation, but isn’t it better to help people rather then not?
Oh GAH “rather than not”.
@anon:
“But what I am seeing lately, in romance sites/conferences and associated blogs, is that I have to apologise for being white. Which I wont do.”
I’ve seen this statement on the rise, and I’m curious. Do you have any examples or is this just a feeling you’re getting in this age of social media?
If we (meaning minorities) are asking romance to be more inclusive, its because we are also readers (and writers), and would like to see more diverse representation. And while some writers are creating characters of color, it can throw a reader out of a novel to read a caricature of their culture.
I will admit, this can also happen if the writer is a minority and a white character is included. But asking that covers not be white-washed and that publishers recognize that their readers come from many ethnic groups is just good business sense imho.
I’m trying to have a conversation, and I don’t mean to put you on the defensive. So if anything I’ve written makes you feel like that, I apologize, because that’s not my intention.
@anon: I was – in a way – referring to both of you.
To self-censor to the point of @Anna Richland kinda makes it almost awkward. That you have specifically placed a white elephant in the room to walk around.
But at the same time, if someone were to make a snarky comment about Irish people and potatoes – well, you know it wasn’t because they were clueless about the stereotype.
So, if you aren’t “joking” about a racial or cultural stereotype, talking about food while shopping for it is perfectly acceptable. But if you start up a running commentary about watermelons and black people (or Irish people and potatoes and it’s not a history lesson)…well, don’t be surprised if someone gives you a major side eye.
@Sirius:
Again, I agree.
Sometimes people just don’t know. But in Handler’s case, he did know. And that makes what he did all the more hurtful.
Personally, I am a life long learner with an interest in other cultures and religions.
Ok, all, let us put this in perspective, as some people of diversity on this loop has called me to the mat to admit: I am white. Therefore I must be a racist, in some form or another, even when grocery shopping. Yes. I got it. Will never comment here again.
@anon: And this is EXACTLY what the linked cached article was talking about, and why US culture can be so toxic to minorities.
Someone *says*, “Certain words and images have been used deliberately to hurt disadvantaged people in the past. It is not up to ME, as a privileged person, to declare that it’s time to “get over it”, or make jokes about their pain. I *personally* choose not to use those words an images in particular contexts, even if my INTENT is totally innocent, because I don’t want to inflict pain on other people, even by accident.”
Someone else *hears* “If you use certain words and images in ANY context, YOU are a BIGOT !!!!!”
And that person is quite understandably irate … instead of gaining insight on how words that are meant in one (completely inoffensive way) can be transformed by the listener’s past experiences into a hostile attack.
@anon: You seem to be having a conversation with people who are not commenting here.
@wikkidsexycool: my reading comprehension needs to improve :(. I did not watch /read/hear Handler’s jokes. I have read here that he made racist jokes, then I went ahead and bought Woodson’s book and that’s all I wanted to read about all of this – her book I mean and not his jokes. So I did not realize that he specifically used watermelons in his comments and was a little confused .
I just want to be clear – I’m sort of sounding like “self-censorship”, but I believe it is more in the context of etiquette. As a life-long resident of the US, I do know the history of these issues (and I would never criticize someone who didn’t for asking – I think that’s admirable to ask – and in a community with many Somali and East African immigrants, I actually wonder how much sway the old stereotypes have, but that’s another question). I feel like I know what to avoid and it’s not that hard to do.
I actually write directly about race – if you’ve read His Road Home you’ll know that I have my two POC main characters talk about their race/ethnic/educational backgrounds and differences with each other, b/c of course people really do talk about it all the time. My very good friend and I probably spent an hour talking about the Woodson op ed today, talking about Ferguson, etc., while we ran errands together and had lunch. I don’t avoid race. I just try to be aware. And avoiding race is, after all, only really a privilege of whites of mostly European descent, isn’t it? As an adult I became aware of that privilege and how I benefitted from it – which I think is part of Woodson’s point.
I hope this link to Washington Post guest column, from a wealthy black father about the ways he’s raised his children, things that as a white mother I don’t think I’ll ever have to do – I hope you can all read this. Hopefully it’s not behind a paywall. It’s incredibly moving and one of the best most detailed drill downs into the daily differences that I don’t even have to think about. For instance, I almost always decline a receipt or a store bag, using my own reusable bag and trying to save paper – never thinking that my child or I might have to prove we’re not shoplifting.
Please read this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/06/i-taught-my-black-kids-that-their-elite-upbringing-would-protect-them-from-discrimination-i-was-wrong/
But – despite being somewhat comfortable having these discussions (heck, I have them here, don’t I?) – I understand that people whose lives I have not experienced due to differences in race, religion, socioeconomic status, language, physical ability – lots of things – have a different place they come from. As a writer, I think I have a good imagination and I read widely and I can guess, extrapolate from things I have experienced, and I can synthesize – but I can’t KNOW. All I know is there is a history of a lot of pain and it’s not over.
So when I think about all that, I think “discretion -better part of valor – nothing in the world is improved by picking at someone else’s wound-” and I talk about apples. Or whatever. It just feels to me like it’s part of old-fashioned politeness – I know these things are landmines for other people, so I just don’t need to go there. I don’t, in the end, view it as self-censorship. I view it as getting along in society by being respectful rather than obtuse. I wouldn’t comment on the calories in a cereal at the store when an overweight person is next to me, b/c I assume they might take that as a criticism even if I’m just talking to my kid next to me (we actually talk food labels all the time, by the way, b/c I’m trying to teach them good nutrition habits and how to shop for food) … so likewise I’m not going to comment on watermelon.
No one gains anything by comments like Handler’s — and there is just so much real estate between acceptable and what he said. I don’t think I’d ever say what he did (fingers crossed b/c sometimes I fear crap just pops out of my mouth and Mr. Richland looks at me with that one eyebrow going ‘whaaaat was that?’… ) – but it’s all the space in between polite and that comment that I’d ALSO like to avoid. It’s easy to avoid the humongous mistake from the podium – and I’ve heard him speak and he seemed like a great guy so I don’t understand what the heck was happening in his brain – but it’s all the minor things that are less than that but still painful that I really don’t want to say or do either.
So that’s my personal point. It’s just mine. Obviously others are different.
Dear God, you all have cotton stuffed between your ears! And if that sounds racist, then so be it. Again, I am tired of being called a racist just because I am a white person. And @ Anna Richland, you and your posts harm more than help the white person, who does object to racism. Avoiding using certain words because they may be taken out of context goes is an act of cowardice, IMO. It makes us white folks, IMO, sound racist, when in fact we are not. And again, you Anna need to shut up and listen to your “quiet, Canadian husband.” Not all non-Americans white people share this bigot view, that you seem to hold, and portray in your posts. Because, IMO, when one has to go out his way to avoid using the word “Watermelon” while grocery shopping, is a bigot, and afraid of the backlash for being a bigot.
The next backlash is a black Storm Trooper in the latest STAR WARS movie trailer. Run with that. Oh. Wait. You have been. It’s the latest news.
Once again, I am tired of hearing that I am racist just because I happened to be born white.
@anon: No one called you a racist. And if that’s what you got out of this conversation, you were looking to be offended to begin with.
Get over yourself. It’s not just about you.
I sincerely doubt you’re being told you’re racist just because you’re white.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/oliver-burkeman-s-blog/2013/aug/15/racist-sexist-you-are-more
@Anna Richland:
Thanks for your post. I understand where you’re coming from, and contrary to what you were told, I think voices like yours are not harmful in the least. You’ve shown a willingness to meet others half-way, and that’s a good thing.
Whether its race, sexual orientation, or a disability, people need to understand that sometimes their words can hurt, and that there may be a historical component to what they say. But realizing this may take time for some of us.
As for me, I would rather keep the lines of communication open so that we can have a meaningful dialogue.
I recently attend a writing conference (SIWC) where I attended a workshop on diversity by Mary Robinette Kowal, (white woman) who stood on her soap box and said, LOUD and CLEAR, if you are a white person who writes a novel your ARE a racist, if you do not include a person of diverse culture in a your novel be it a historical or an contemporary. Needless to say, a number of people left her lecture; I was the minority of people who left her lecture; a white person.
@anon: I’m sorry. Are we currently at the SIWC? And does Mary Robinette Kowal speak for everyone here? I’d say “no” and ask you to take that baggage somewhere else.
I also invite you to put that baggage down cause if you are going around with that attitude…well, not too much to be said other than it’s distasteful as well as incredibly me-centric.
Maybe white people discouraged by their own ‘sensitivity’ from writing outside their race, should read this:
http://sffpoc.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/emic-etic-and-the-depiction-of-otherness-in-sff/
Please stop blaming people of colour for your own issues.
@anon: It has nothing to do with having an agenda. It has to do with having a spot that has been poked so many times, it’s permanently sore. Try reading Woodson’s piece on Handler’s remarks, and it might help you understand.
Actually, I agree with @anon up there. The impression I get from the discussions on several romance boards and blogs lately is that if I’m white I’m automatically a racist, especially if I don’t go trumpeting support everywhere for minority authors. If I also don’t run around trumpeting support everywhere for m/m or gay romances, well, then I’m homophobic too.
And it’s not just in the romance world that this attitude/feeling exists. In my personal life, my landlord has put the rental property I live in up for sale. I have several framed historic prints on my walls representing American Civil War battles and recruiting posters, Union and Confederate, and the Realtor who came out here to look at the house and price it for the landlord – the first thing out of their mouth when they saw the these custom framed, reproduction prints? – “You have to remove those from the premises, they’re offensive.” These are historic period prints, but are offensive. When I protested, do you know what I was told “You aren’t allowed to protest. You’re white. You don’t get offended. They need to be removed from the premises.”
So, the attitude going around is indeed offensive to white people just as much as the minorities/people-of-color, white people are apparently just supposed to ‘suck it up’ and ‘do it’ because we’re white. It’s reaching the stage where I’m starting to actively avoid much of the romance community because of the way it harps on and on about certain topics to the point where I tune out the conversation it’s so repetitive.
Yes, there are problems, but beating it to death and then grinding the corpse into the dust, doesn’t help matters any.
“I tune out the conversation it’s so repetitive.”
Yeah, must be hard to get the same response, when you say something like “These [Confederate recruiting posters] are historic period prints, but are offensive”. The nerve of those people, pointing out that just because they don’t offend white people, that doesn’t make them right.
I just don’t know what to say, personally. It’s on the tip of my tongue, though….
@willaful: I know all about racism. Try researching “The Troubles.”
@M: And @ M I did try responding to you your post, but it seems my post was censored. Wow! didn’t think DA was like that.
Are you DA?
*sitting back, eating popcorn, dodging tossed soda cups*
@MrsJoseph: Are we currently at the SIWC? And does Mary Robinette Kowal speak for everyone here? I’d say “no” and ask you to take that baggage somewhere else.
Are you the saying that a non published author should ignore the sage advise of MRK, Diana Gabaldon? Oh horrors of horrors!
Yes, next time I fly the US, I MUST claim I am a white woman, to customs, and reveal my thoughts on the price of watermelon lest I am thought as a racist, or…. God forbid a terrorist,,,,can I saY THQAT I wanted t say : God forbid, but
@anon:
” I know all about racism. Try researching “The Troubles.””
The word you want is sectarianism.
@Anon
When you read book reviews, there are plenty out there that are bad, shallow, or stupid. You wouldn’t claim no book review is worth reading because some reviews aren’t worth reading.
Just so, the existence of bad social criticism does not mean that all social criticism is bad, which is what you seem to be claiming. It’s worth seeking out the most respected opinions to engage with an issue you don’t fully understand. It took me several years to understand white privilege as a real and serious issue, rather than a way of saying I should feel guilty because my skin is on the paler side.
Screw it. @anon: You want to label yourself a racist, go right ahead. Cause you’re the only one calling you a racist here. I care less how you feel and I’m sick to death of your bitching. “Oh woe is me! I have to treat others as I wish to be treated. Unfair! Unfair, I say! Those 10 Commandments…!”
@AnnSomerville – Ah, I get it now, I’m supposed to not keep any historic art I like because it could offend some potential visitor. Yes, that was sarcasm. It seems that the only acceptable speech in any public forum at the present time MUST be all inclusive at all times or else you are “offensive”. Clearly, speaking at all could be considered offensive – after all you could potentially be excluding the deaf or hard of hearing because you insist on talking!
*sigh* This is why 99% of the time I feel like I’m speaking to brick walls if I don’t toe the current public party, majority opinion line all the time. I don’t feel accepted any longer by a community that loves to scream about how accepting they are of all things… yeah, all things as long as we all like’em and they’re of the correct inclusive thought pattern! Yesh.
@anon & M; methinks the ladies doth protest too much.
It’s always heartbreaking to see people so terribly victimized because they aren’t permitted to say or write or display images of anything they want without suffering the crushing burden of being PUBLICLY CRITICIZED.
I mean, free speech isn’t truly FREE if “somebody with an agenda” has the nerve to actually disagree with me. They might even say so out loud!
Join with me, sisters — the real problem with publishing and the Internet is vicious anti-white racism!
Once we’ve fixed that, we can take on that other evil scourge of liberty: the unspeakable oppression of poor, downtrodden male gamers….
@hapax: Ha!
Seriously, if your answer to someone saying, “Hey, maybe rethink what you’re saying/doing because it’s painful to a lot of people” is “I’m so oppressed!”, then I don’t think you really understand oppression.
You know, I was trying to figure out yesterday why this upset me so much (I had, naturally, assumed that “never commenting here again” in fact meant never commenting again — and considering they’re anon and have never commented here before, no loss!). This is a great place where I love to read the comments, but there seems to be some sort of dogwhistle when an issue about race comes up — folks come out of the woodworks to complain about how hard it is to be white.
This isn’t about you. It was never about you. Stop making it about you. I get that you’ve been taught that the entire world is all about you, and learning that it might not be and you have to share is hard because you think you’re losing special treatment or — gasp — people might treat you like you have been treating others.
If you’ve treated others well, then you have nothing to worry about, now do you?
If you’ve spent your time making awful racist jokes and are scared that’s the worst that will be taken away from you, do you really have anything to worry about?
Do you REALLY think someone is going to attack you in the grocery store for talking to the produce? Or are you ashamed at being called to task for hurting other folks with your words and wanting to continue to do so without being called THE WORST THING EVER — racist. Oh NOES! It’s so much worse than y’know, being shot because of the colour of your skin by the people who are supposed to be protecting the community.
You don’t care when someone says “hey, that’s hurtful” — because goodness forbid you be called a mean person! It’s THE WORST. So much worse than people giving you shit every single day because of who you were born as. SO much worse than the one night you can enjoy a book award and have your friend stomp on your foot and let you know that he’s always considered himself better than you, that he’s never listened to how much it hurts, and that he’s allowed to go every day not worrying about racism because he won the genetic lottery.
So yeah. That’s why it bothers me so much. Folks here are kind, understanding, compassionate, and thoughtful — folks here don’t always agree, but the discussions are important and worth having. To come in and demand all attention be on you and everyone reassure you that ohhhh it’s okay you’re not REALLY racist if you want to make shitty racist jokes or not care about how your words impact others, then throw a tantrum when that’s not what you get… yeah.
There are plenty of places you can go to have your ego soothed. This is not one of them.
@Lindsay:
I’m pretty sure Jane and Robin have made it pretty clear, actually, that this *is* a place where your hurt feelings at getting challenged are a greater concern than being hurt by oppressive comments, but what would I know.
@Ridley: I couldn’t disagree with you more there, but even if (big, big IF); even if that were the case, basically what you are saying is “how dare Jane run her blog her way.” Indeed, going by your reaction for the past year, it would seem as if this blog were your property, and Jane and the rest of the contributors were both trespassing and behaving offensively.
@Anon – talking about race issues does not equate to calling all white people racist. I have to agree with the above commenter that it appears you are airing grievances you are compiling from other incidents. Maybe you’re just venting, but the other commenters are treating you with respect so I’d hope you’d have the same courtesy and not place accusations against them that haven’t taken place.
@Ridley:
Why yes, that grudgewank of yours does make your ass look big.
You have a blog and a twitter where you can say the nastiest shit in utter impunity all day long. And you surely do.
Why don’t you fuck off to them and stop leaving nastygrams like turds in some else’s swimming pool? It’s petty and contributes nothing whatsoever to the conversation, and your yearlong butthurt is only interesting to your adoring fans.
You know what? I shouldn’t comment here anymore. I agree. It is what it is, and that’s that.
However, does that have anything to do with the veracity of my comment? Is this thread really any different than the “safe books” discussion?
While I appreciate the defenses of DA’s freedom to run its own blog the way Jane sees fit, I’m sure people are making their own decisions every day about whether they want to visit here and/or participate. I get that there are people who dislike and disapprove of us for any number of reasons, and that’s fine. We all need to manage things the way we decide is best and know that it will never be universally approved.
@Ridley: There are all kinds of oppressive comments. I don’t know if you realize how many people refuse to engage you simply because they don’t want to be heckled by you and not because they agree with you. But maybe you don’t care. Maybe that’s what you’re going for, because you figure that they must all be offensive assholes anyway, so good riddance. But you’ll never really know whether that’s the case, because you’ve chilled engagement and shut down the discussion before it can even start with many people who may even agree with you on any number of issues. I think that’s a form of oppressive, policing commenting, too, and I also think it profoundly undermines your social justice advocacy. I’m sure you disagree, and, like I said, maybe you don’t care what anyone thinks who won’t engage with you. But given the fact that you’re still free to express your disapproval here of how DA is run, I frankly don’t think we’re doing too, too badly with the open forum thing.
‘@M: “I’m supposed to not keep any historic art I like because it could offend some potential visitor.”
No, your *landlord* doesn’t want you to offend potential *purchasers*. This isn’t about you and your tastes, it’s about them and a commercial decision that they don’t just want people unbothered by your taste to consider buying the property.
If your landlord’s possible customers included Jewish people, as they certainly would do, your landlord is not going to be happy about pictures or posters featuring the Nuremburg rallies, because there are Holocaust survivors and their relatives still alive and purchasing houses today.
American slavery was a holocaust for Africans. The Civil war is not a time of happiness for them, or indeed for white people who supported the end of slavery – or who just lost relatives in that war.
Your landlord is presumably happy to sell to African Americans. The landlord therefore doesn’t want his tenant shoving reminders of an appalling historical period, one whose resonances are still felt to this very day, into the faces of his potential buyers. Which buyers have a perfect right to tell the owner of a house displaying offensive and painful images to shove the house advertisement where it fits.
@Renda:
I’m about 2 weeks into my free month of scribd and I also have KU (pretty much from day 1). I’ve used scribd way more than I’ve ever used KU. I am going to drop KU at the end of my current month and just have scribd (at least for a month or 2, then I’ll reassess).. Right now, scribd is meeting all of needs right now.
I read the-digital-reader.com article and am a big bit confused about this quote from Mimi Strong..”It doesn’t (sic) even cover the emotional toll of having to field emails from confused readers who can’t understand why they can’t buy my books.”
If you are a KU member you can buy the author’s books, but is she saying if you ARE NOT a KU member, you are unable to purchase books from an author involved in KU? That sounds ridiculous. I’m not sure what Ms Strong’s issue is… and I’d like to know
@Sandra: I think she means that people who shop at Kobo, Smashwords, Apple, and B&N (for example) and NOT Amazon cannot buy her books at their preferred retailer. It means that her books, when enrolled in various Kindle programmes, are only available on Amazon and cannot be available elsewhere.
@Sandra: Since KU is Kindle-exclusive, presumably it refers to readers who have some other sort of non-Kindle compatible reading device.
(And telling potential customers “Why don’t you just download the Kindle app?” is *not* an effective response. Believe me, I’ve tried it.)
” It means that her books, when enrolled in various Kindle programmes, are only available on Amazon and cannot be available elsewhere.”
Smashwords’ Mark Coker warned authors about this back in 2011
http://blog.smashwords.com/2011/12/amazon-shows-predatory-spots-with-kdp.html
Why don’t authors read the terms and conditions before they sign up to non-obligatory programmes?
“Telling potential customers “Why don’t you just download the Kindle app?” is *not* an effective response. Believe me, I’ve tried it.”
Downloading or buying/reading books through it? I use Kindle for the mac and it works fine. What issues are you having with it?
@Ann Somerville: It’s not that the app doesn’t work fine — I’ve downloaded it to my tablet as well.
But when I suggest it to people (note, this is providing tech support at the public library, which may or may not be representative of the e-reading population as a whole), folks clutching their Nooks and iPads usually give me a wide -eyed harried stare which translates as, “You mean that there’s ANOTHER techie hurdle I have to jump through? I just wanna read the book!” … and then they just give up.
@Ridley: But see, that whole “veracity of my comment” thing is your opinion. Just because you assert things in the most aggressive way possible doesn’t make them true. This is applicable to all of us, of course. But when you’re talking about how oppressive DA is *ON DA* there is an irony component that I think may undermine your comment’s veracity.
I have no problem with your dissent; I am perfectly capable of defending my opinions. But when your comments are thoroughly enmeshed in personal affront, which they almost always are, it’s virtually impossible to actually engage any issue on the merits. In fact, that approach is one of the fastest ways to derail a conversation about the actual issues, IMO.
I haven’t read any of them? (-;
@hapax: “and then they just give up.”
Ah, okay. That’s been the problem with Amazon – and DRM – from the start :(
iPad, of course, has the same barriers. But at least the app there comes pre-installed.
I don’t know what to advise. E-books will remain a poor fit for a lot of people because of this until such time as there is a common format, without DRM. I should live long enough to see that happen.
@Ann Somerville: Once I upgraded to Yosemite on my Mac, I was no longer able to use the Kindle app on my computer. This is not biggie for me, since I generally don’t read on my computer, but I don’t know how many other Mac users this affects.
“how many other Mac users this affects”
I upgraded, no issues with Kindle. The app itself is pretty eccentric sometimes. Maybe deauthorise and reauthorise your computer? I use Kindle on my iBook much more than on my iPad (where I tend to use the iBooks app even for Kindle books, shh :) )
@Ann Somerville: Actually, I just checked Mobilread, because I actually got an incompatible software message when I installed the new operating system and figured Amazon hadn’t updated the app yet. Apparently this is a known issue and it’s likely because I’ve got an older version of Kindle installed: http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=248202.
I like how instead of addressing my point about this thread resembling your “safe books” post you’re telling me why I have no friends then scolding me for having hurt feelings.
Whatever.
@Janine: I’ve read two and DNF’d two others. I’m always baffled by these year end “best” lists. :(
Robin to Ridley: “But when your comments are thoroughly enmeshed in personal affront, which they almost always are, it’s virtually impossible to actually engage any issue on the merits.”
Ridley: Makes a reply which is nothing but personal affront.
Ridley, the *veracity* of your comment on the safe books thread:
“This is tone policing padded out to essay length and neatly encapsulates the problems many of us have with this site.”
Can’t be challenged or addressed because it’s pure opinion. Obviously you believe it – what is there to discuss?
The *usefulness* of said comment to the discussion there (or now) is zero. It was off-topic, addressing the post only by virtue of it being snide at the author and the site, and left nothing for anyone to engage with. It was also just another one of your nastygram drive bys.
Considering how dismissive you are of other drive by trolling, you seriously expect anyone to give two shits about your own?
Whatever indeed. Stop turning every discussion to one about your paaaiiiinnn. You’re not Khan. You’re just another voice on the internet, and one who is increasingly strident without virtue of being right. Cleave to your SJ friends who support your manner of doing things (and the abuser who they worship). But don’t imagine you’ll pull a Requireshate on DA like she did on 50books_poc.
Jane hasn’t stopped you commenting here. Is there any reason you can’t use that privilege for something other than to shit on DA?
@Ridley: Actually I did address your point, but I’ll try to clarify further.
The entirety of your “point” is that this thread is similar to another thread, since you’re basically presenting a conclusory statement and demanding agreement based on your own assumptions about DA, which amount to your “DA is the tone police” argument.
First of all, not every discussion related to how people express themselves is about tone. There are a lot of rhetorical strategies that disrupt and shut down discussion that have nothing to do with tone. At Dear Author, there are and have always been minimal rules of engagement to foster open discussion, and they have never changed.
My responses to you in this thread attempted to clarify that it’s not and has never been about tone. It’s about the ad hominem and the way that is a form of rhetorical oppression. And the fact that you, who clearly does not object to the ad hominem (including toward DA contributors), is commenting here in your usual tone with your usual objections to the site, undermines the credibility of those objections.
Also, I will note that as soon as you introduced the accusation about tone policing, the discussion was immediately derailed away from the important and substantive issues of race and representation into one about the “validity” of your belief that DA tone polices.
“does so in a way that treats self-publishing, traditional publishing, and the rise of digital books with equanimity.”
“Equanimity” does not mean “with equal weight” or “impartially”. It means “calm emotions when dealing with problems or pressure”.
@HJ: Uhm, yeah, because that’s what I meant. No hysteria, in other words, which we sometimes see in discussions of different types of publishing. I would have used equitably if I had meant evenly (although equitable is more complex than that, too).