Diversity in Romance: Not just buying, but reading diverse books
Essays / Letters of Opiniondiversity / reading67 Comments
Note to readers: This column was originally posted at my small personal blog. We thought it might interest DA’s readers too.
Reading diverse books and diverse authors (in terms of non-white and non-straight authors) has been a goal of quite a few online readers, in romanceland, SFF, and mainstream fiction more generally. There have been articles about reading only women authors, and the #weneeddiversebooks hashtag and its offshoots continue to flourish. When one of the major book conventions managed to pick 30 panelists and the only “diverse” member was Grumpy Cat, it’s hard to argue against that kind of initiative. I’ve tried to review more diverse books at Dear Author over the last two or three years, and for the most part I’ve succeeded, although obviously I could do more.
Although I consciously try to approach each book I review the same way and assess it on its own terms, there have been authors who said flat out that they thought I was being harder on them (and more unfair) than I was to white authors. Which brings up another aspect of the “read more diversely” effort: are we supposed to review the books the same way we review non-diverse books? Are we supposed to give authors points for trying and go easier on their books’ flaws so that more people will take a chance on them? Or is our main job as readers just to buy them, and our main job as reviewers to promote them?
I recently read a post about supporting diverse books, which talked about buying, promoting, and marketing, but said nothing at all about reading. I not only find that vaguely insulting (I’m not your publicist or your mother, thanks), I think it can be counter-productive in the long run. I remember buying romance novels by African-American authors years and years ago, when they were justifiably complaining that the big review sites didn’t review them. This was before I was a reviewer, but I could still buy the books and I intended to read them. But I never did. I bought them, announced via blog comments that I bought them, and then they went into the TBR. So the authors got a sale, but that was it.
Buying the books isn’t enough, you have to read them and talk about them with honest enthusiasm. Tweeting out that automatic Amazon link which tells the world you bought a book might get someone to go and look at it, but unless you talk about it, why should anyone be persuaded to give it a try? Buying books is about putting money in authors’ pockets, which is important (that way they can keep writing). But it’s not reader enthusiasm, it’s reader subsidy. It seems obvious to me that actually discussing a book, whether you bought it or got it from the library or borrowed it from a friend, is more likely to lead to new readers than just buying it.
Authors may think that attention to diversity when buying books is the first step, or the minimum one, the one that leads to more buyers and readers. But it can work in a different, less productive way: someone can buy the book, feel they’ve done a good thing, toss it on the TBR and then never read or talk about it. The latter attitude doesn’t generate more reads or even more sales, whereas reading a book written by an underrepresented author or featuring underrepresented characters, and then sharing that experience, puts the book into the larger conversation.
Bearing all this in mind, how have I done on the diversity issue, i.e., what have I been reading this year? It turns out to be easier to figure that out than it would be for previous years, because I finally started tracking my reading. In January I set up an account at Booklikes. I also started two reading challenges (the PopSugar challenge and SuperWendy’s TBR Challenge), and I’ve been keeping track of those using a spreadsheet. Amazingly, I’m on track for Wendy’s challenge and I’m nearly halfway through the PopSugar challenge.
I’ve read 30 books so far in 2015 (that figure is print, ebook, and audiobooks combined). This is nothing compared to a lot of genre readers, and it’s low for me compared to other years, but I’ve been reading longer books, I think, and I’ve been in a bit of a genre slump. Here’s how the books break down:
| Female | POC Author | POC Main Char | LGBT Author | LGBT Main Char | |
| Total thru 15 July | 20 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 5 |
| Percentage | 66.67% | 13.33% | 26.67% | 10.00% | 16.67% |
Remember that these numbers represent books, not authors; I have read more than one book by the same author across the spectrum of above categories.
The number of female authors isn’t surprising, given that I read a lot of romance and mystery (and my mysteries this year have tended toward the cozy side). In the POC category, I’ve clearly read POC books by non-POC authors, but what the numbers don’t show is that I’ve read non-POC books by POC authors as well. That’s less true for LGBT authors and characters, although I’ve read two books by non-LGBT authors which feature major LGBT characters.
I haven’t been consciously trying to read more POC and LGBT novels, although I started the year intending to read more gay fiction. My half-year list includes Michael Nava’s historical novel, City of Palaces, and EM Forster’s Maurice. In addition, I’ve just finished Sean Kennedy’s latest Tigers and Devils novel (not included in this tally) and I’m currently reading Caleb Crain’s lovely Prague-set novel, Necessary Errors.
The POC authors include the usual suspects for me (Jeannie Lin, Aliette de Bodard and Michael Nava) as well as some new authors (I’d never read Sandra Kitt before this year).
By comparison, here’s how my Dear Author reviewing looked last year (plus some books I didn’t review there but put on my Best of 2014 list over at my old personal blog). The total for 2014 (for the combined categories) is 32 books:
| Female | POC Author | POC Main Char | LGBT Author | LGBT Main Char | |
| 2014 total | 23 | 10 | 9 | 5 | 6 |
| Percentages | 71.88% | 31.25% | 28.13% | 9.38% | 18.75% |
It’s apparent that when I consciously try to read more books by and about underrepresented people, as I do for DA reviewing, I manage it. When I’m reading primarily for my own pleasure I still read in those categories, but not as much. So making a concerted effort is probably important if I want to increase my numbers. And given that a number of those books wound up as recommended reads, it’s an overall benefit for me to have stretched myself.
You can’t see this from the aggregate information, but in 2014 (as in 2015), some of the 9 books in the “POC Main Character” category came from books written by non-POCs. There’s disagreement over whether this “counts” toward more diversity, since it doesn’t increase the visibility of POC authors. I don’t want to get into that debate here; there are compelling arguments for and against. I basically think more POC everywhere, like more LGBT everywhere, should be the main goal unless and until the non-POC/LGBT authors are crowding out the underrepresented authors. But I’m a reader, not an author, so my stakes are different.
The other thing I noticed in my reading, which the numbers also don’t tell us, is that “POC” winds up being an overly broad, even misleading label by which to categorize books and people if our goal is to increase the visibility of underrepresented authors, characters, and settings. For example, it makes no sense to me to label the powerful and aristocratic members of Tang Dynasty China as “POC.” That we do that is more about us than it is about them. I understand we’re talking about fictional characters, not people, but it’s our (predominantly US-based) ignorance about them (and our US history) that others them, not who they are in their own setting. With a Jeannie Lin book I’m clearly reading the work of a POC author when I read her Tang-set romances, but with GG Kay I’m not. In both cases I’m reading about affluent, urban aristocrats. These are not disprivileged people in their own environment.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence suggesting that books, especially genre books, set outside European and North American settings don’t sell as well, so they don’t get published as often, no matter who is writing them. So in that sense they’re underrepresented, no matter who writes them, and regardless of whether they should be designated POC or not.
On yet another hand (let’s use the goddess Lakshmi’s hands since she has four), there are authors and books which are not counted as POC but which are definitely underrepresented across genres. For example, I’ve been slowly working my way through David Peace’s Red Riding Quartet, which is set in Yorkshire in the 1970s and 1980s. These were times of severe economic hardship, the non-official characters are almost entirely poor and/or minority, and one of the themes of the books is the extent of political and police corruption. The characters don’t have much privilege, and Peace himself doesn’t come from a privileged background. But he’s not POC. So on my spreadsheet his books get a “no” for both character and author. So would the Scottish author James Kelman, whose Booker award-winning book was heavily criticized because he wrote in the language and cadence that reflected his Glasgow setting.
On Lakshmi’s fourth hand, there are the non-POC people who were historically oppressed because of their sexual identity or orientation. EM Forster was affluent enough not to have to work to support himself, took degrees at Cambridge, and was a member of the Apostles, no less. But his artistic/professional life choices were constrained by his homosexuality (as was his personal life). When I read Maurice the collision of privilege and exclusion was evident on every page. And that’s still true, although thankfully to a lesser extent, in Tigers on the Run and Necessary Errors.
I want diversity to be an important component of my pleasure reading. I want to stretch myself. That means reading more books by underrepresented authors and featuring underrepresented settings, which includes the POC category but is not limited to it.
If you’re interested in more information on the specific books I’ve read, I’ve reviewed a number of them here at Dear Author and there are more informal reviews and notes at Booklikes. And feel free to ask questions in the comments.
I’ve had the same debate with myself about tagging Jeannie Lin books. I started putting multicultural tags on the first books and novellas I reviewed. Then after a discussion (here? elsewhere? I can’t remember) during which people mentioned the same issues you have, I’ve stopped since her Tang books (at least so far) have taken place in an enclosed (so to speak) world in which all the characters are one ethnicity. Well, okay maybe in the novella “An Illicit Temptation” where the hero is Khitan there is a difference but for the most part, there isn’t. I do tag them as Historical China and Tang Dynasty so hopefully people will realize this isn’t the standard Almackistan historical.
This isn’t a criticism of you and your tagging, but a question I constantly ask myself: How much should m/m romance “count” as “diverse reading”?
Obviously if I’m reading about LGBT characters written by an LGBT author, I’m going to accept on face value that it’s a fair representation. But if I’m reading about, I dunno, “gay for you” space robots by a straight female author — how much is that “reading diversely” and how much “fetishizing the Other”?
Obviously these issues lie on a continuum; and I’m not going to apologize for liking what I like. But that Hustle-con article (no link for you!) and its casual mention of switching the hero’s race in their (plagiarized) story in order to capitalize on “jungle fever” (I think it’s necessary to use their term even though it made me sick just to type that) makes me wonder about my efforts to look for POC characters as well.
@Jayne: It’s a dilemma once you really start to think it through. I still use the “multicultural” tag because if the tags are supposed to help readers find books with underrepresented characters, then they fit that category. But the books themselves don’t usually involve cross-ethnicity relationships, and the culture they’re set in isn’t “disadvantaged” in the sense we mean it today. I know you know all this, I’m just thinking it through out loud.
This is often the problem with umbrella categories, i.e., those that combine a number of disparate characteristics in service of a more general interest. It highlights that one similarity but can bury a lot of important differences.
@Jayne: I’ve wondered about tagging myself when I do the deals. Do I indicate its MC or do I just let it blend with the rest of the books I’m posting about. On the one hand I don’t want to draw attention to its otherness. I just want MC books to be part of our bigger genre. On the other hand, people look for those specifically.
@hapax: I love seeing new cultures and reading about new experiences. That’s part of the appeal of non US based books for me but that doesn’t always mean that they are POC/MC books. one of the reasons I love Nalini Singh’s series is that her books are truly all encompassing and POC/MC issues are part of the larger world building scheme. If they are other, they are other in the greater world she has created.
I think there is a problem with the general argument online. What I’m getting (and I could be wrong) is diversity is being equated with (a) a person who is not part of the majority in the situation they are in (b) they must be underprivileged in some way (c) must actually be a race issue.
Now like I said, maybe I’m misunderstanding the argument. This seems to start out that way and then shifts towards the end of the post so I’m unsure exactly where this specific argument falls. Here is what I’ve been getting on other sites though:
(1) Diversity is not dependent on a character being the “odd man out” in the book. If I read a book where ALL the characters are Japanese, I still consider the book diverse. Why? Because it is something I am not familiar with in my day to day life. The culture, customs, food, etc. are completely foreign to me and I see that as diverse. It is giving me a look at something different and exposing variety into my reading. By negating those moments because they are not a “diverse world” seems to be forgetting who the market is. This is especially important if the book is contemporary. We’re supposed to believe in contemporary settings, we’re out there. Our world still exists. Therefore, it is variety because you are dropping me (a white woman) into a culture I am unfamiliar.
(2) Underprivileged is a partial requirement. This just seems to lack all concept of diversity except for the portion which is required to have true diversity. If I read a book about affluent characters who are African-American does that mean it is not diverse? What if they are affluent gay characters? Affluent Chinese characters? Does that somehow negate their diversity because they have money and “privilege”? What if they are highly respected but not wealthy? They have agency but are still “diverse”?
(3) Race as part of diversity. Okay I’ll give you the concept of race and diversity. I get it but I struggle to understand how an underrepresented group like Yorkshire characters cannot be considered diverse. Is it because they are white? How can we possibly argue race is a defining factor in diversity? A white person in the U.S. is not the same as a white person who was born and raised in Hong Kong. These people are never going to identify themselves the same way. A person who grows up in the middle of Africa is not going to consider themselves the same as an affluent African-American surgeon. It’s taking only one aspect of a person and attaching a diversity sticker to them. It seems unfortunate.
This week “Top Ten Tuesday” on Broke and Bookish is about diversity in books. I sat down and looked over books read and I discovered something interesting. I have no idea which books were diverse and/or written by diverse authors. Seriously not one book jumped out. Why? Because I do not read that way. I read what looks interesting to me. If it features a Latina woman exploring China then so be it. Here’s the thing though, I do not pay attention to race when reading. The culture of the character is more important if it holds importance to the story. If a character says “I grew up in California” and then never mentions anything else other than having a troubled relationship with their mother then there we go. That character could have any skin tone, genetic make-up, whatever. I also don’t picture the characters. Maybe it’s a brain defect but I don’t “see” them in my head. So there is no “Well you see them white” issue. I don’t “see” them at all.
On the whole author front? I can pick about three authors out of a line-up. Their back cover pictures are never looked at (especially digitally). I could never tell you how many authors I read who are (a) from a different country (b) a different race (c) a man or a woman (esp. with initial pennames). I’ve seen J.K. Rowling’s picture a million times but I probably could sit next to her and never recognize her.
I’m all for diverse reading. I’ve been picking up books about other countries, LGBT romances, etc. and I’ve been enjoying them. Here’s the clincher though. I did not pick up any of them because of that factor. I read a M/M romance a few months ago because I read a review that talked about how amazing the story was. I didn’t even know it was M/M until I started reading it.
The actual idea that we should read a quota every year or make a point to expand our “diverse” reading seems like a step in the wrong direction. Shouldn’t we be reading these books on their merits and not on the fact a “diverse” author wrote about a “diverse character”? Isn’t the goal to see all the books shelved side by side and marked as “Romance” or “Fiction” or whatever? Aren’t we making it worse by drawing attention to the fact and harping on whether or not something even qualifies as “diverse”?
Hapax, not easy questions I agree. What if it is a m/m romance written by a gay male author . I do not know if I take it as face value that the characters are necessarily realistic there – and sometimes it is fine by me. What if it is a romance written by POC straight female author? M/m romance written by a lesbian author? Well researched romance about two guys from different cultures written by a straight female author? I do read gay fic and even that sometimes and even more often now takes on romantic elements and hopeful ending. So I do not have answers. I suspect I will continue searching for more diverse topics but the story will have to interest me before anything else you know?
Great article Sunita!
@hapax: m/m books are something I’ve struggled with as well. m/m readers and authors frequently point to people who have become more informed and accepting of LGBT issues by reading m/m and queer romance as a reason to count it as filling a diversity function. But as you point out, some of the books are closer to Harlequin Sheikh books in terms of how they represent LGBT life. We don’t count Sheikh books as diverse (at least I don’t).
I counted m/m, but I’m as conflicted about it as you are.
If I start talking about this I may never finish.
But first, I’d like to thank you, Sunita, for your post. And also thank DA for re-posting it.
For my part, I’ll just try to focus on the issue of finding multicultural works, or IR (interracial romance, or books featuring POC on some sites).
I’m not trying to pick on Carina Press, just using them as but one example. If categories can be made for BDSM, Djinns, Angel and Demons, Etc, then where’s the category for either multicultural or interracial romance?
I only say this to highlight one of the main issues regarding diversity in romance. One of discovery, or discoverability of books with diverse characters.
Amazon is another site where a reader must search to find works that have diverse protagonists, unless the author is with a major publisher. On their main page for books, you can find the category of Gay and Lesbian (Yay!) but no category (not yet, you have to keep searching) that mentions multicultural or IR books.
Link: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=
I rejoice whenever I see a book with a protagonist of color on that main page. But its not often, and after some research I’ve found articles that talk about Amazon’s business practices. Okay, I get it. But going back to the point of Sunita’s post and speaking as someone who writes and self publishes using diverse characters, every little bit helps.
Thanks again for bringing this up, because readers can’t purchase and read books with multicultural characters if they don’t know they exist.
@T.S.: This post is making two different points (which is probably one too many): (1) Authors emphasize buying POC/underrepresented author books, but while buying serves an important function for them, in the long run you may get more visibility and sales from emphasizing reading over buying. (2) We (authors, readers, bloggers, social media) use the term POC as if we all agree on what it is, but if we really start to define it, we run into problems almost immediately. The way I see (2) following from (1) is, if I want to follow authors’ exhortations that I should buy POC books, what books are included and what books are not?
I’m not talking about race, but I guess I am talking about characters who are not part of the dominant group in the book’s setting. By definition they are going to be less privileged.
You’re talking about your position in the market as a buyer/reader, while authors are talking about their position in the market as sellers. The two groups have overlapping but distinct interests. If someone buys and read a GGK book set in medieval China, they’re probably going to learn a lot and see the world in a different way. But that reader hasn’t bought a book by an underrepresented author.
I don’t think anyone is talking about a quota (except maybe indirectly when people talk about only reading women or POC authors for some period of time). I certainly don’t have a quota in mind as I read. But for many people, if they don’t consciously think about reading books by underrepresented authors or with underrepresented characters, they read very few or none.
@T.S.: basically what Sunita said mostly. Believe me – I am not interested in fulfilling my yearly quota of reading diverse books. I am interested in reading diverse books if and only if they have the stories I have a chance of enjoying same as with any book. But if I at least do not try to search amongst less visible authors I think my chances of discovering that they may have wrote a good story are non existent no?
@Sunita:
I guess I struggle with “underrepresented author”= diverse reading. I don’t see why I, as a reader, should pick out books by people because of their race, financial stature, sexual orientation, etc. just as I don’t want my work or livelihood to be talked about because of that. That seems like it is missing the point. The goal is for the author to share and sell and the reader to buy and read. If we’re going to add these descriptors to everything then what’s the point? It’s the same as diverse casting on television. Diversity should be happening naturally not forced. By telling readers we should be reading “underrepresented authors” (who are they by the way? What determines an “underrepresented author”?) aren’t we drawing more attention to the fact they are “other”?
[What is GGK? I have no idea what that means.]
@Sirius:
Less visible does not mean diverse though. I’ve read plenty of books with 0 reviews on Goodreads and only 1-2 on Amazon. That does not mean they are diverse books though. It just means they are less visible.
Tangentially related, but a really good read: https://intellectusspeculativus.wordpress.com/2015/07/16/guest-post-max-gladstone-on-bees-and-diversity/
(via Natalie Luhrs at pretty-terrible.com)
@T.S.: yes of course . I should have said less visible and diverse because often enough it is a big overlap.
@T.S.: “Diversity should be happening naturally not forced. ”
As a librarian, I have to force myself to read diversely. By which I mean, I have to read romance, and mystery, and thriller, and horror, and spec fic. Not only that, but I have to read diversely *within* genres — not just “fantasy”, but epic fantasy, and quest fantasy, and grimdark fantasy, and urban fantasy, and alternate history, and…
Why do I do that? Well, partly it’s my JOB to be familiar with all these diverse genres, so I can know about and purchase and recommend the books my customers will be looking for.
But also it makes me a better reader. If I just read what I am “naturally” drawn to, I’d read little but space opera and trad Regencies and magical girl manga.
And my understanding of what makes a good “science fiction” and “romance” etc. would become increasingly narrow and self-referential and self-reinforcing until I ended up like those poor “Sad Puppies” who can’t understand any books that don’t involve manly white heroes and spaceship battles.
But because I “force” myself to read outside my comfort zone, I not only discover things I like that I thought I wouldn’t (or never occurred to me even *existed*), I’m able to go BACK to those books that I “naturally” like, and see them within the context of, and in conversation with, a much richer world of literature.
(Simple example: how much greater is my enjoyment of Bennett’s CITY OF STAIRS because I not only understand the fantasy conventions, but the tropes of noir and spy novels, that the author is referencing and in some cases subverting?)
If this is true of genres — which in the end depend on a relatively narrow range of reader expectations and experiences to make them “work” — how much MORE true is it of settings, characters, and author identities?
Thanks for posting this! I do think that authors and readers are thinking completely differently when they talk diversity – as a reader, I make an effort to read books with main characters who are under-represented within that genre, in part because I like reading from a different point of view. But that doesn’t necessarily support authors who are under-represented in their genre, as you’ve pointed out.
And I was thinking about your point about reviewing just this morning. I recently read a couple of historical romances by an African-American author, featuring POC lead characters. I didn’t like the writing and I struggled to finish the first one, but read another because historical romance is such a white genre generally, and I wanted to support bringing more diversity to the genre.
@wikkidsexycool: Thanks, I appreciate your comments.
I agree that visibility is a huge problem, and it’s worse for diverse/underrepresented books because they are fewer in number, so people don’t see the variety. They see one, or at best a handful, and make decisions to read or not based on that tiny group. And where to shelve/list is a dilemma. If you integrate the books, people will sometimes bypass them without realizing they’re doing it because the book feels “different” (think of the diverse/underrepresented character books in Harlequin’s regular lines). But if you have a separate, then the people who already want the books will find them but a lot of potential readers won’t click on the list at all.
@T.S.:
YES!!! I DO think diversity in characters is a great thing. I read books with diverse characters. I write books with diverse characters.
I DON’T think dwelling on the diversity of the writer is healthy. I would love to see writing become a field where writers AREN’T discriminated upon because of our race, sex, weight, etc. Everyone with a talent and passion for writing should be welcome.
Judging a writer’s work based on who the writer is makes me cringe. I was asked to contribute to a multicultural series. The series had heroines of color. I’m white. I’m happily married to a wonderful Chinese-Guyanese man so I have some experience with interracial relationships. Many of my closest buddies are women of color. I had them proofread my stories. My editor was a woman of color. I was really careful about ‘getting it right.’
And I believe I did. I didn’t get a single complaint about my characters. I DID, however, get quite a few emails from writers of color telling me I shouldn’t be writing in the subgenre because I wasn’t ‘one of them’.
Now I think twice about writing heroines of color and that’s sad. So very sad.
So yes, I wish we wouldn’t dwell on who the writer is. IMHO… that’s doing more harm to diversity in romances than good.
@hapax:
I agree with your premise as a librarian. I work in a public library as well and have to sometimes read things I would not normally pick up. I’m picking those because of genre or popular author (or unpopular author) to help readers. I am not picking them up because they are “diverse” by definition. This is also an argument for variety not diversity which is what I’ve been referring to. To me science fiction vs. romance is not the diversity we’re looking at here.
I can force myself to read a spy thriller. I can do that even though they hold almost zero enjoyment for me. At the same time unless it is surprisingly amazing I’m never going to talk it up or read more. So sure I read diversely but I had to do so. It had nothing to do with making a case for diverse work.
My argument stems from readers forcing themselves to read a book about a specific type of person just so they can say they read diverse books. Then we have the media and bloggers and respected individuals telling us we HAVE to read these books to help diversity. We have people telling us we HAVE to have certain break-downs within conferences, panels, tv shows, interviews etc. We don’t HAVE to do any of those things. We should have diversity within those things but the people cast, asked to be on panels, etc. should be there because they are the best people for those things. It should have nothing to do with whether or not they are “diverse”.
When I set out to read I want to read the best book I can for what I’m looking for in a book. I’m not looking at the back cover author pic or the genetic, sexual, etc. make-up of the character. If I am then I’m perpetuating the problem. I’m drawing attention to it. I’m labeling it as “other”. I’m reading it as “other”.
When I tag on Goodreads I tag by sub-genre. I say “Hey this is a Contemporary romance” or “Hey this is a fantasy-fairytale” book. I do not have any tag for multicultural. I will mark a book as “travel-INSERT SUBGENRE” if the book takes place outside of the U.S. I do have a tag for M/M. I’ve been rethinking that one as of late and might get rid of it and leave them within “Contemporary”, “Historical”, “Paranormal” instead. Why draw attention to it?
@T.S.:
“aren’t we drawing more attention to the fact they are “other”
Uh, what? I’ll just chalk this statement up in your post as an unfortunate turn of phrase.
“Diversity should be happening naturally not forced”
I wouldn’t call bringing up an important issue “forcing” anyone, especially after years of books that either
misrepresented certain cultures (for example, the exoticizing of Native American males in romance novels and book covers) or ignored some groups.
As someone who grew up during the overlapping period of segregation and the civil rights movement, I can tell you based on my experience that diversity doesn’t happen naturally. The dominant culture usually dominates. In the US, “diversity” can still mean grinning caricatures and stereotypes of some under-represented racial groups (For example, Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben, still smiling in US local grocery stores). So one way to think of it, is diversity being a way for readers to get stories from a culture by those of that culture, to combat years of caricature and misinformation.
On DA and some other sites, there have been comments brought up regarding the problem of novels, and not just in romance, that deal in “whitewashing” covers to appeal to primarily to the white demographic. This is another age old issue that continues to happen. Author Ursula Le Guin has been pretty outspoken on this issue, regarding her book covers not representing the diverse characters in the pages.
Link: http://www.yalsa.ala.org/thehub/2012/12/10/it-matters-if-youre-black-or-white-the-racism-of-ya-book-covers/
In my earlier post I mentioned the problem of finding books with diverse protagonists, either due to no category or being buried on a website.
And still, when under-represented groups decide to create their own (for example Univision, BET, Telemundo) critical barbs regarding not joining in, or why should there be a need for ___________ (fill in the blank) get tossed around.
Many children seek out diverse books to build their self esteem, books that may have a protagonist who looks like them or of their same sexual orientation.
That’s one of the positives regarding encouraging diverse books. Representation. And sure, they won’t be everyone’s cup of tea.
But speaking for myself, having lived in a time period where just about every thing I read, saw in movies or on TV or were advertised told me my culture wasn’t smart enough, pretty enough, or light enough to be “equal”, I’m glad I lived long enough to see the issue of diversity in romance or other genres is being talked about, whether the discussion is pro or con.
Okay, I’ll get off my soapbox. I think I’ll leave this thread for a while.
@wikkidsexycool:
Okay so I’m not saying they are “other” in the sense that apparently you are taking it. In fact arguably I’m stating I don’t believe in “other”/”Diversity” etc. in the sense this argument has been leaning. I view the book as a book. I view the character as a character. I do not describe them as diverse in my tagging, discussions, etc. because I think we shouldn’t be drawing attention to the “difference”. To me, everything is equal. I do not read certain types of books because someone out there is labeling them as “diverse”. So in that sense the offense is not there.
I’m also leaving this thread. I’m saying the fact that I do not read books because of “diverse” factors. I read them because they interest me. Also I would argue stereotypes exist both ways across all race, orientations, religions, etc.
@T.S.: Sorry, GGK refers to Guy Gavriel Kay, a best-selling and acclaimed author who writes Fantasy (sort of alternate historical), and he’s set a couple of books in medieval China. He’s not Chinese or of Chinese descent.
I couldn’t agree more; it should. However, in publishing, it isn’t. Not by a long shot. As I said in my post, when you have a major industry event (BookCon) that can only think of one qualified non-white participant for their topline panels, and that panelist is Grumpy Cat, that’s ridiculous and offensive. It’s certainly not the case that there are no non-white authors who would fit their criteria. And they don’t even have to talk about “diversity” issues. They can just, you know, talk about books.
If you find discussions of diversity misguided or beside the point for you as a reader, then I can see why you find this post unhelpful. I wrote it for people who are actively trying to discover and read more books by authors who are underrepresented in fiction, and which feature characters that are underrepresented. This isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. This is about unpacking what the ramifications of various choices and recommendations toward greater diversity in buying and reading are.
@hapax:
Given that over 30% of the m/m romance writing world falls somewhere on the queer spectrum, from transitioning authors to gender-queer to bi and lesbian and even some gay men, how do you decide?
I mean, I’m a byke, but is my writing of gay men an actual representative thing? (even if my gay male friends claim I was totally gay in my last life–which I wasn’t. It was the one before) Or is it only representative when I write lesbians or bi women? I touched off TransFail for daring to write Maid Marian as a prince-raised-as-a-girl. Which was not representative of 21st century transLatina experience.
@Rachel: That’s the nub of the problem, isn’t it? A book that features diverse characters and settings, and does it well, isn’t necessarily going to be written by someone who is culturally or ethnically from that background. I think that people read POC books written by non-POC authors for the same reasons that so many books with POC characters have them bemixed-race and/or put them in non-POC settings: there’s a sense of familiarity, a signal that the book won’t go too far in the direction of the unfamiliar.
Like you, I tend to read more books by a single POC author (or at least I used to), in order to keep signaling that they should be published whether I liked them or not. But then if I review them, I can wind up with several meh reviews. Which doesn’t go over too well. ;)
@Cynthia Sax: I’m sorry that happened to you. I’ve been guilty of assuming that someone who looks/presents as white can’t know the POC experience and I’ve been wrong enough that I try not to do that anymore.
But if we don’t boost POC authors, they don’t get bought, or read, or contracted (if they want a trad publisher). A handful break through, and self-publishing opportunities help somewhat, but not as much as we’d like. It’s still an uneven playing field.
@Sunita:
But how do publishers/editors/readers KNOW the author is a POC?
Unless they have a photo attached to their pen name, they don’t.
If you can’t SEE a person, you can’t discriminate against them based on what they look like.
Most readers don’t know what writers look like.
The fact that E.L. James could attend a romance conference after Fifty Shades broke out and not be recognized proved that.
I’m a writer and I would be hard pressed to tell you what the writers I interact daily via the internet look like.
My legal last name is Chinese and that’s the name I query under.
Editors and agents still read my manuscripts.
I’ve never been asked to change my last name (some have even suggested that I write under it instead of Cynthia Sax).
I HAVE been asked to change last names for my characters
or to make heroines thin
(my personal fave – eye roll).
IMHO… the issue isn’t discrimination against diverse writers.
It’s discrimination against diverse characters.
Address that and writers of color will see more success.
Thanks for the provocative post, Sunita. It provides another new and important lens to the talk of reading diversely and what that entails, and that’s solidly awesome for the overall conversation.
What I struggle with in the questions you bring up is perhaps the undiscussed limitations of diversity even in relation to your parameters, and how we can discuss true support for diversity in publishing. For instance, which of those books deal with mental and physical disability? Etc. Understanding diversity and privilege in order to better understand how much of it exists, and therefore how much is erased in fiction, is continuously important.
The argument of “diversity” gets pretty twisty when it comes to race, class, etc. Like, of course I would agree that a historical novel featuring those of lower economic class is diverse in socioeconomic terms – but it could be non-diverse in terms of race, gender, sex, sexuality, etc. I think part of the problem is that we perhaps see the general term of “diversity” as exclusive rather than taking the time to clarify what we mean when we apply the label. Doing so also benefits our reading because it makes us aware of how intersectional (or not) a text may be. I think we need to worry less about a general diversity label and focus more on the specifics of diversity when looking at a text.
We need to acknowledge the complexity from the get-go so diversity doesn’t get stalled with a bunch of people saying “Well, white people can be diverse too,” or something similar. Because it’s problematic to continually have to reframe arguments in terms of privileged viewpoints such as whiteness in order to make them validated – something I see many readers doing online in response to this. We also need to acknowledge that diversity doesn’t necessarily mean lacking in specific privileges, and that what may be “diverse” to us can still be bookended with a lot of privilege in order to function as a popular/financially successful narrative.
I also think texts and authors are separate, but both do matter. Not because an author is not allowed to write outside of their identity, but as readers and as consumers we can’t deny our participation in a capitalistic system that includes financial gains for those whose work we purchase. So, while I think reading is a part of the equation, we as readers often forget how our spending on books (which for many of us is lower than our reading based on libraries, subscription services, etc) can impact diversity – not just in publishers buying more diverse books, but in the reality that diverse authors struggle to see the same financial gains from writing as a career than their privileged counterparts.
Your call for reading to be included in the conversation is a pleasant but serious reminder that we need to think about privilege & oppression in our spaces of enjoyment, because our passive activity has been trained to go for narratives that don’t address those issues/narratives that fit into limited ideas of diverse narratives.
@Cynthia Sax: “Unless they have a photo attached to their pen name, they don’t.
If you can’t SEE a person, you can’t discriminate against them based on what they look like.”
Um, even then, not so much. For example, I pass as Anglo, but I’m Latino (Mexican). While it may be possible to make a reasonable assumption of racial origin if the person has really obvious markers of a specific “race” (whatever the heck “race” means, anyway)–very fair, very dark, etc.–those of us with multicultural backgrounds aren’t so easily identified.
But, yes, I agree. The issue is the absence of diverse characters.
@P. Kirby: @P. Kirby: @Cynthia Sax: I agree that there is resistance to diverse characters, but I’m having trouble with the idea that non-white authors face no barriers to publication. The fact that non-Anglo authors take Anglo-sounding names when they write non-diverse characters would seem to suggest otherwise. Of course there are exceptions, like Nalini Singh. But how many?
@John: Thanks, John.
Checking the books quickly, at least 11 feature characters with mental or physical disabilities that are clearly laid out in the text, so just under 18 percent. There may be more, but I’d have to dig into the books themselves. I was focused on the POC/LGBT aspect because that’s what I’ve been thinking about (and the intersectionality issues with those categories).
I agree. I’m not arguing that those writers shouldn’t be making the same financial gains from writing. I’m arguing that buying the book may not have the same knock-on effects for them of increasing visibility and readership. Because if people are buying the book to make a statement and then letting it languish on the TBR, or reading it and disliking it and as a result not buying another book of that type (or author), then it’s not going to increase visibility past that initial point of purchase, and it’s not going to lead to word-of-mouth recommendations.
@Sunita:
I didn’t use my real last name (which is Chinese in origin) because I write erotic and my mother-in-law is very religious.
Choosing a pen name is usually a marketing decision. Some considerations are ease of recall and ease of spelling by, yes, the target market (which for English-language romance novels is mostly anglo because, well, we’re writing in English).
Which simply proves the point–we can’t determine a writer’s background by her/his last name. I didn’t even assume Nalini Singh was a writer of color because I know so many folks with that same last name who are not. I don’t really care what she looks like. Her books are terrific and that’s all I need to know.
(face palm)
I knew if I posted enough, I’d make a terrible typo.
I meant the English-language romance novels is mostly anglo
@Sunita: At the very least, there is a barrier to sales when an author’s name is in the cover and isn’t one that (for American readers) is easily spelled or pronounced. I’ve seen the advice to use a pen name in that scenario in multiple places.
Even if the only reason (and I don’t think it’s the only reason) were that readers or bookstore employees have to spell a name correctly when entering a name into a search engine to search for the author, that would be enough to give some authors an advantage in the marketplace. There’s a reason why many successful romance authors have WASPy last names that are based off male first names (Roberts, Phillips, James, etc.).
@Cynthia Sax:
Ugh.
I meant the target for English-language romance novels is mostly ENGLISH-SPEAKING, not Anglo.
For example: My dear hubby’s last name has already been run through the Anglo filter. His father was given an Anglo name when he immigrated.
@Sunita:
Sunita, imho you’re right.
There are any number of authors of color who bemoan either the lack of support from their major publisher or state that they can’t get signed. True, there are white authors who speak of the same challenges, but many of the excuses given to some authors of color seeking either representation or a publishing deal make it appear as if there is no market for diverse books.
As with many of the comments I post on here, I like to include links:
Link: http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/08/20/341443632/to-achieve-diversity-in-publishing-a-difficult-dialogue-beats-silence
@wikkidsexycool:
In the interest of fairness, I also wanted to add this link to an article by writer Kris Nelscott. She speaks of the reservations some in the publishing industry had with her being a white author and writing a black detective series:
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jun/26/us-writer-self-publishing-industry-rusch
@hapax: it is! I think I will get his “Full fandom five” next.
@Janine: Yeah, I don’t think that’s the only reason. I’d buy the reasoning if it weren’t the case that many other media areas have stopped requiring participants to Anglicize/WASPify their names.
I used to show a slide in my US Immigration class which had the original names of famous actors (TV and film), as well as some writers, on it. I stopped a few years ago because the students didn’t really get why this was forced on people in the early and mid-20thC and it wasn’t something they thought about today; a person’s name is her name. I’m not talking about Ellis Island name changes, obviously.
When we have Gyllenhals and Deschanels and Ejiofor now in movies and television, why do we have to have British names in romance? I agree it’s marketing, but it’s not just easier. We’re readers, after all. If we can manage Cholmondley surely we can manage Srinivasan.
@wikkidsexycool: I’ve also heard more than one story of minority authors being discouraged from writing outside their minority subgenre. That, combined with the ongoing and apparently widely accepted recommendations to have UK/northern European sounding pen names, makes it hard for me to believe it’s just about the characters.
My sole, but very important, beef with the whole “diverse books” push (Lord how I loathe that term, right up there with multicultural) is that the focus is on the wrong thing. We’ve had books with diverse characters for awhile. Some done with care and some done not so carefully. Example. I’ve come across several romances where the author’s idea of diverse is to slap what they feel is a foreign sounding name on one of the main characters. Or make a main character the stock, tragic, lost, gay-for-his-best-friend boy or rent boy. Diversity in storytelling 101. Then these characters wade through a story line that probably was not written with them in mind in the first place. And ends up reading like any other generic romance. Writing diversely means more than inserting a foreign name or affixing a sexual orientation to a basically stock character.
This is where writers who are different ethnicities, or cultures or lifestyles or have contact with such, can add to stories. Not saying that non-POC writers can’t pen the books. I have no right to tell anyone what to write but I sure as hell can request that the depiction of non-default characters ring truer. I want “other” authors’ views of a couple embarking on a relationship. It brings another “eye”, another “voice” into the mix. It is needed. This is why I believe readers find themselves in a slump at times. They are reading the same old, same old by the same set of authors. That is all “diverse” writers like myself ever desired. A friggin’ fighting chance to present a story to a readership who says it wants a different book to read.
Also, I second that discoverability is a bitch. It is next to impossible to get a diverse book noticed. I have a publisher and it’s difficult. And since a number of book readers and buyers use blogs as gospel in their book selection, it shuts out many a diverse writer’s book of being seen as they are waaaay down the list for getting picked for review consideration over the latest USA best selling author.
Then there is the belief that books written by “other” writers are somehow inferior, shoddy. All i can say is if you are game for reading any book, you will run across some dogs. There is no road map showing the way to “Sure Thing Diverse Book Land.” if interested, you will have to separate the wheat from the chaff just like you did when you found your favorite “default” authors.
Finally, i have to say this as it really puzzles me. i write paranormals and historicals. When I have gotten feedback on my historicals, the commenter is always concerned with the authenticity of my research. Why? Are my non-White characters not acting like you are accustomed to seeing? I’ll say this. When I write a historical with non-White main characters, I do MORE research than those who pen the standard, wallpaper historical with all White characters. I have to research the White world of whatever time period in which I’ve set my story AND research the non-White characters’ world AND where they fit in it. I don’t do historical FANTASY. if you don’t want history, don’t read my historicals.
Diverse books? You want them? There are waiting to be discovered.
I view diversity in books as being based on authors outside the mainstream. My take is that the reason Jeannie Lin writes historicals set in China is, in part, to make the chars look like her, reference issues of her/her parents’/grandparents’ culture, etc. (this is my guess, I mean she’s not writing books set in Incan Peru or the Pharoah’s Egypt).
If you aren’t paying attention to the authors, you can end up the Harlequin syndrome where the billionaire Russians are indistinguishable from the Billionaire Italians, except in name.
I think a lot of this is the actual industry itself. I don’t mean to be rude, but a lot of editors and publishers seem to love throwing readers under the bus. I suspect they do this because they want to keep doing the same old thing over and over but blame someone else. But readers are much more open and intelligent than they’re given credit for.
Some readers do look for diversity. Others don’t – they’re not avoiding diversity, but that doesn’t factor in to how they read. Personally, I look for diversity because that’s what I read and want to write, but neither of these readers is wrong. They read for their own reasons and I respect that.
What helps, I think, is if you put diverse books in front of readers. Poc, LGBT, etc. writers should get the same chance that other writers get. Represent them, let them write in the genre they want, acquire their books, let them write the characters they want, don’t just shoehorn these writers into diversity panels – put them on panels, oh and market the books properly and with the same enthusiasm. And bloggers and journalists can pay attention to this. Maybe I’m being naive, but I believe that’s the answer.
They said the same thing about TV. Nobody will watch a show about x character(s). That turned out to be really a bunch of nonsense. They decided that viewers were lazy, ignorant, narrow minded people who wouldn’t relate to their fellow human beings. Why any industry would want to cater to such horrid people is beyond me, but they were wrong anyway.
Put the books in front of the readers and let the readers do the rest.
@P J Dean
That’s certainly been my experience – expanding my list of reliable, regular authors to be more diverse (in terms of race, sexual orientation and gender identify) is a slow, ongoing process. I tend to forget how long it took me to build up my current list of fave authors and I get impatient with myself. Finding new authors is like dating – lots of bad first dates.
Last year was the first year I kept track of my reading and I was kind of shocked when I calculated that only about 10% of the authors I read were POC and about 10% were queer. This year I’m closer to 20 ~ 25% in both categories.
@P. J. Dean: I agree that discoverability has become even more difficult when you factor in the different types of review blogs, the rise of reviews at Goodreads, LibraryThing, Booklikes etc., and the rise of self-publishing. There are just so many books, how do you get yours into the right hands? And diverse/unusual books have a bigger problem because when readers see a book as unfamiliar or harder to slot into a category they recognize, that book becomes more than just another book, it stands in for many unfamiliar books. So if you don’t like it, you can unconsciously decide that all books that resemble it will be the same. And you may not be able to articulate precisely why you don’t like it, unlike a familiar book where the flaws (for you) are clearer. So moving on to the next book, even choosing it, can be more difficult. That doesn’t excuse not trying, just that it’s a slightly different process.
@SAO: I’m sure that Lin’s background plays a role in her selection of settings and characters, and I believe she does have a Chinese grandparent or great-grandparent, but I’m pretty sure the rest of her ancestry is Vietnamese. And she does a lot of research for that era of Chinese history. So it’s a combination of background and interest.
But you can obviously be from a minority background and want to write something that is neither the default European setting or your own. Aliette de Bodard has a fantasy trilogy set in the Aztec empire, and she’s French-Vietnamese. She also has a series of SF stories set in a Chinese-type culture. They’ve been well received by SF readers and I wish we saw more of that in romance.
@Anne Westcarr: I think readers bear some of the responsibility too, though. We’ve discussed over the years how readers will say repeatedly that they want more diversity in their reading choices, but then when such a book is reviewed, talked up, etc., it doesn’t sell particularly well. Or it sells a bit when it comes out and there’s chatter and then there’s no followup of more books, or more discussion. If it were one book I’d say fine, it’s the book, but it happens over and over again. Self-publishing offered another kind of opportunity for readers to flock to books that trad publishers won’t take a chance on, but then a lot of the bestselling authors and books turned out to be ones that are like the trad published books. It’s frustrating.
@cleo: It’s interesting what happens when you actually write down the numbers and look at them, isn’t it? I expected more LGBT and fewer female. I also realized that, like PJ Dean says, I read multiple books by the same authors, so it’s not reading more authors, necessarily, just more of their books.
@Sunita: Yes, I agree with you.
A very interesting and thoughtprovoking post.
As a reader, I just want a good book, and that’s the most important thing to me.
As a blogger, I write a review explaining my personal experience with that book. I want to describe it and in order to do that, if its ‘diversity’ has something to do with it, I mention it, but I don’t use special tags for it, except LGBT.
I recognize I’m one of those who want more diversity in her readings, yes. Diversity in the sense that I want different landscapes, different social classes, something new, original. I want to read books about China or India or Tanzania or Poland or New Zealand, but not because of the author’s or the characters skin but to know something about other countries and people and their issues. To see something different.
As a continental European, as a matter of fact, any British or USA novel shows enough ‘otherness’ for me.
I don’t think we should buy books we are not going to read, just to be supportive of a certain group of writers. That’s a good political statement, but it’s not a very intellectually honest attitude towards books.
@Bona: Yes, diversity in reading can be about variety, not just attention to underrepresented authors and characters. And what counts as underrepresented, or unfamiliar, really depends on the the background the reader brings to the experience.
Given I buy, borrow, and receive as gifts more books than I have time to read, I’m fine with buying a book to send a signal. But sending the signal isn’t enough.
Hopefully, my thoughts on this will be clear. I know as a reader, I make it my business to read as widely as possible. I may be slow getting around to some things but I am trying and admit that I can do better. See for me, I think we’re all richer for it, knowing and learning from each other. I hate that publishers don’t see the need to support or promote diversity in books and reading even if there isn’t a market for it. Some books, authors, stories should be supported if they are deserving. I realize that kind of thinking is idealistic but still, it would be nice. I think in TV, at least they sometimes do this, see the value in something and try to get an audience for it. Frex, The Wire stayed on HBO for five years despite the lackluster ratings. It was too important of a show to just ignore because there wasn’t a market for it. I think that’s what I’m trying to draw parallels to with publishing in that publishers don’t seem to take too many risks like that. I’m not saying that don’t ever but they don’t do it often enough. Ok, that’s it. Sorry if this came out confusing. Also, my expertise lie elsewhere so take this opinion for what it is: an opinion.
@Keishon: That’s a great point about HBO and The Wire. We used to see that in television a lot: supporting a show because it gave prestige to the network even though it didn’t get a big viewership. We don’t see that as much anymore, sadly. Same with literary and mainstream fiction, publishers used to publish a handful of books because they were considered important, with sales being a secondary consideration (Farrar, Straus, & Giroux had that as their basic operating philosophy, and somehow they stayed in business a long time). It’s harder to do that in romance because we judge the worth of a book based on how it resonates for each individual, not by agreed-upon “objective” measures. In other genres I will often say that I didn’t particularly like a book I could appreciate its quality. I say that sometimes about romances, but far less often.
That doesn’t mean there aren’t such books in romance; far from it. But it’s not a common metric. That means it’s harder to make an argument about publishing that’s separate from sales success or case-by-case preferences.
The new availability of diversity in books has given me a cornucopia of fabulous choices in an area I didn’t realize I was craving until the subject of diversity cropped up. I have always wanted to read about ‘the other’ whether the other was defined by ethnicity, nation, sexual experience or identity. Sinking into another person’s skin and experiencing their world is why I read. Are there parts of the world or genres that I’m just not interested in? Of course. I don’t read diverse simply to read diverse. But when diversity crops up in the kind of book I love to read? Bring it on. [Piper Huguley’s historicals and Ben Aaronovitch’s urban fantasies come to mind, and even though I don’t usually read m/m, Think of England by KJ Charles was catnip for me on several levels. Thanks to Willaful for bringing that one to my attention.]
@hapax:
Some of the librarians I’ve come in contact through the years haven’t seemed to try to keep up with genre works, so I’m sure your patrons must appreciate your efforts. As a creative writing teacher I was constantly disappointing students because I hadn’t read some of the top authors in their genres, or off the best seller lists. Between writing my own stuff, teaching and researching, by the time I am reading it’s definitely for pleasure.
I don’t know how to contact you. If you’re willing to let me email you, please drop me a line at planetpooks at gmail etc. Thank you!
@Patricia Burroughs [aka pooks]: Talking and recommending diverse books is definitely the goal, and it motivated my post. But your comment and my reading history demonstrate the complexity behind “diverse.” I was reading the RWA hashtag off and on last week, and there were two tweets on diversity that stood out to me. One said, “we don’t need more diverse characters we need more DIVERSE AUTHORS.” The other said “Who should be writing diverse books? Everyone.” Guess which one got more RTs (even controlling for the popularity of the twitter accounts)?
In your example, 2 of the 3 authors you cited are (I believe) writing outside their personal experience/ethnicity. In my tally, I read quite a few books with POC characters that were written by non-POC authors. We have to be careful (and by we I mean me for sure) that we don’t get all our diverse characters without paying attention to whether diverse authors are getting a fair shot at writing them.
@Sunita: I wish I could *like* this comment. You said everything I wanted to say only more eloquently.
@Patricia Burroughs [aka pooks]:
” I have always wanted to read about ‘the other’ whether the other was defined by ethnicity, nation, sexual experience or identity.”
This response is my own. I don’t claim to speak for anyone else but me:
I am not “the other”. I am a living, breathing woman of color. A female, just like YOU. How would you enjoy being labeled as “the other” which is a term imho that comes from a place that views any minority group as different, and not in a good way.
“Othering” people does nothing to celebrate diversity. It’s roots are old, and the ideology behind it, if fully researched in not positive, but oppressive.
@Sunita:
As a reader, I was constantly asking myself in the first book or two, “How does he know this? Is this true of this community’s experience?” when I started Aaronovitch’s series. As a writer I asked myself, “Do they read this and mock, or do they like it?” Ultimately I just ended up the kind of fan who orders the books in hardcover from England because I don’t want to wait until they finally show up in the US. And as a reader, I obviously do look back and think more about the characters and the world than about who or what the author is–when they are that good.
I came into the writing biz in the late 1980s being told–and accepting–that white writers shouldn’t ever write people of colors [as MCs] because we had never lived that experience, and to do so would be at the very least presumptuous and offensive. People of Color, however, could write white people because they live in the white world and even have to master ‘being white’ to get ahead. That made [and still makes] a lot of sense to me. I did include a few minor characters of color but other than that, toed the line out of fear that if I didn’t, I would inevitably Get It Wrong and be attacked. Honestly, I was most afraid of getting it wrong so horribly that I deserved to be attacked. And this was before the internet. [wry smile]
I carried these fears into the new century, even as I saw a tentative sea change developing. But the final nail in that coffin of fear was when I read Mary Anne Mohonraj’s two-entry series in Scalzi’s Whatever:
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2009/03/13/mary-anne-mohanraj-gets-you-up-to-speed-part-ii/
And the book she referenced, Writing the Other by Nisi Shawl and Cynthia Ward.
http://www.writingtheother.com/
They all assured me that I should be writing the other.
That I would get something wrong.
And I should do it anyway.
And if my honest attempts get it wrong in such a way that I inspire other writers to do it better, then I’m part of that sea change. I’m a link to getting a new writer of color to grab a keyboard and snarl, “I can do it better.” Is that my goal? Oh of course not! But that also means that if I fail miserably, I have still been part of the change and inspiring other writers to write is what I live for as a teacher, so is not a bad thing.
I was part of a diversity panel, “The Right to Write,” at RT Dallas, along with Laura Parker Castoro, Piper Huguely, Sonali Dev, and Jayde Brooks. We each brought different experiences and nuances to the table, but all shared the belief that not only can you write whatever you are driven to write, but you should do so. More than one mentioned that as a writer of color, she was also writing characters who weren’t of her own background despite suspecting that there would be those who might not like it. There was strong consensus on the panel that even when you are writing about characters in your own community, you will be attacked for ‘getting it wrong,’ because your experience and somebody else’s experience can be so opposite, even in similar situations.The keys, of course, include research, effort, intent and most of all–respect.
I know in your commentary you aren’t speaking out against writers writing outside their communities, but I felt inclined to explore the subject a bit. Plus, I am cravenly seizing the opportunity to link to Mohonraj’s essays, and Shawl & Ward’s book, which are liberating, compelling and yes, daunting when you take them seriously.
By the same token, I also TOTALLY appreciate you using my list to make the point that there IS a difference. My off-the-cuff list proved my point, I guess. For better or worse, unless I’m researching, I almost always only read for pleasure, which means, selfishly. When reading for pleasure, I am simply looking for books that look intriguing to me, and I just happen to love books about people who are not like me, however ‘like me’ is defined.
“This sounds like my kind of book” is almost always what gets me to click and find out more. Then it’s the first paragraph, scene or chapter that gets me to buy and ultimately read. That led me to Huguely, Dev, Brooks, Butler, Jemisin, Aaronovitch, Charles, Esquivel, Morrison, etc., etc., etc. just as it led me to Heyer, Pratchett and Harper Lee.
Thanks for such a thought-provoking post, Sunita.
@Sunita:
Again, as the dinosaur in the crowd, my first published book was in 1988. When deciding whether to write under my married or maiden name I was advised by booksellers, “Don’t use your married name, whatever you do. Never choose a name that people can’t remember or pronounce if you want them to be able to walk into a book store and ask for your books.”
My married name is not ethnic.
So being white-blind, I have always considered that idea of name change to be universal and not a way of disguising ethnicity.
Today, since search engines can generally help you find a name or word even if you can’t spell it initially, that shouldn’t be as big an issue.
All that said, if I had an unspellable, unpronounceable ethnic name and was willing to change, I’d choose an easier name that represented me just as well, still owning and embracing my ethnicity. Not to look white. To make it easy for readers to find my books.
@wikkidsexycool:
I’m using the term that was used to me, but was embracing ‘the other’ as a very wide array of differences, not just ethnic.
My apologies for continuing to use the term in discussions where I should have been more specific. I won’t do that again.
Thank you for calling me on it!
How would you define a diverse author.
Is it someone who can write in a diverse range of genres.
Or is a diverse author always a lesser known author, but in that case, how would you know which less well-known authors should be promoted, and which ones should be allowed to fade into obscurity.
Is a diverse author different from the typical white American, how would you know by glancing at a name what Ethnicity The author is.
@Patricia Burroughs [aka pooks]: As readers we want to read what we enjoy, what stretches us as human beings, or what feels like a warm fluffy blanket when we need it. Those payoffs can come from any author. But fulfilling our own pleasure doesn’t translate, has not translated, into a widespread acceptance of work by authors outside the “default” race, ethnic, and national categories. As a reader looking for a satisfying book, I don’t care whether a great read comes from the author’s experience or imagination as long as it’s a great read. But if I don’t pay attention, I (and a lot of other readers) don’t read many books by underrepresented authors. And that’s the fly in the “who should write diverse characters? Everybody” ointment. Of course everyone should have the “right to write” the characters that speak to them. Otherwise can we really call ourselves champions of the creative process? But we have to look at the systemic effects. We need to support diverse character representations, sure. But we also, at the same time, and just as strongly, have to support diverse authors writing whatever they want to write, by reading them and talking about them and making them as big a part of the conversation as the books and authors we talk most about right now.
@Anon: In this conversation and in my post, “diverse” is mostly being used to signal characters, authors, and settings which are underrepresented in the genre. But diversity can also mean variety, so the discussions can get a bit muddied.
You can infer the ethnicity of an author from a name if you know it is a real name, or if you know it is a pen name that has been chosen to signal the same ethnicity. In today’s social-media-driven promo world, authors also have biographies and occasionally photographs, which also give you clues. But you can get it wrong, too; it’s inference.
@Sunita:
We agree on all points. And I’m particularly glad you said “diverse authors writing whatever they want to write,” because the opposite would be to say that they could only write about their own communities and haven’t the right to write otherwise.
As for the “of course” all writers have the right to write, that is because we are in a brave new world, and largely because writers writing outside the publishing box have been able to find wide readerships and prove that there is a demand for more than what the traditional publishers have believed. That “of course” has not always been there–for any of us.
Again, I agree with all your points, and also those who have said this is such a broad subject with so many ramifications it’s hard to pin it down.
What gets me reading more diverse books is reviews of a specific book from followed reviewers, from friends/reviewers I know I have shared reading tastes in common, random reviews from interesting sounding unknown reviewers and even posts on divine risky with lists of suggested books and authors.
I don’t want to read, even for the sake of diversity a bad book or one made diverse in some person’s view because it included some really boring trope (I’ve about had it with chick lit books where the female M.C. has a gay male best friend with no role in the book other than to take the info dump, flatter her and be her fashion genie …). Don’t slap an ethnic name or a new skin tone on a side character and call it supporting diversity. Don’t do some offensive caricature racist hate speech attempt. (Okay, don’t slap in something that was just bestselling into a bland boring book either because wasn’t selling or getting published — adding a vampire to a bad book does not make it a good book either.)
I read to enjoy the reading. Other than when I get in the mood for something different, no, I don’t make myself read across all genres — that’s great if you want to or if you have a job like a librarian where it can make things better for you — but not for me. I like what I like and there are genres I know I don’t enjoy reading. A suggested diversity reading list of books in genres I like — that works.
Tagging or shelving books indicating diversity on book sites where you can, that can help discoverability. When I’m in the mood to find a new author, a new book, those tags can encourage me to try one over the other. Not a perfect option because clearly everyone won’t agree what tags to use for what; “POC” might be used to mean author or character …
It may not be the most politically correct reason, but one reason I like reading books with diversity is the “originality” — meaning bringing me out of the same old same old territory and into different cultures (when we’ll done). Loses me when still boring same old same old even if a diverse author or diverse characters — a cardboard character is still a cardboard character and a dull book is still a dull book.
What doesn’t work for me — being told what not to read. If I enjoy reading a straight white guy’s book, I’m going to keep reading that author’s books until I don’t enjoy. If I enjoy a POC author’s book, I’m going to keep reading that author’s books until I don’t enjoy. Deal with it; no one tells me what to read or not to read.
Don’t tell me I have to spend my limited time doing heavy duty online research to figure out which author is diverse and why. I’ll either like the book or I won’t; if new to me author I’ll glance at beginning of book in store/library or the sample when shopping online. I’ve learned the hard way to sample although I resent that time, too. Time is for reading I enjoy, not for more work by way of inline research or some quota to me.
Don’t sneer at anything I do read.
Don’t tell me to stop reading _______.
Don’t tell me I have to read a quota of anything or that x percent of my reads have to be anything.
Or that, while I loathe the whitewashing of characters on bookcovers, I have to find appropriate bookcovers (I don’t usually look at the cover when choosing a book, my ereaders are set to list view instead of bookcover view plus they are eInk and grayscale doesn’t always show skin tones well) — when I hit the bookstore or library and I’m after a book a review made me interested in, looking at book spines and backs to read descriptions or I’m in the “new” sections of genres I like where I’m flipping every paperback over immediately to read the back — too many years spent ordering from lines of text on an order form in the back of books or cards in the card catalog to now train me to look at bookcovers to find reads.
I don’t go near self-published author’s without a recommendation from a friend or trusted reviewer. The time thing. The drama with author’s thing. The couple of years I spent wanting to support indie-/self- publishing on principle (and because first handful I read were great books) only to realize I was really dreading and putting off the next read because less than 1 in 5,000 had been enjoyable (most wound up DNF’ed quickly at least but the DNF decision was hard for me who had always eventually came back and finished all books). I don’t need to dread reading; needs to be enjoyed.
Do tell me about great books and great diversity books. Do read what you want. Do let me read what I want. Don’t assume because I am reading a new release or re-reading an old favorite by a non-diverse favorite author that I am against diversity or not interested in a really good book you just read in the same genre by a diverse author.
As important as it is to support diversity and read more diverse author’s and more diverse characters — a bad read is a bad read, I’m not up for a bad read no matter how much it supports anything. I don’t need more demands, quotas or deadlines on anything; reading is one way a I escape from demands, quotas and deadlines Never sneer at what anyone decides to read.
@Debbie: Thanks for a very thoughtful comment. I think that many of us read romance for escape and comfort; not just for escape and comfort, but those are important.
Isn’t it arrogant to assume that every character in the book is white , unless specified otherwise by the author .
For me , A character is a person first and foremost , and his ethnicity rarely comes into my mind .
Great post, although a lot of controversial issues stem from it. I think aside from readers being open to different types of romance themes, authors should be wary of cliches when writing a romance novel. Here’s something to ponder on: https://www.chatebooks.com/blog-How-to-Write-a-Romance-Novel-The-5-Clichs-Authors-Should-Avoid
The first book in my Urban Fantasy series came out last year…and I hope to finish the second, Black Stones, sometime next year. The characters are all POC’s as MC’s.
https://www.amazon.com/No-Trail-Behind-Gary-Ray/dp/0986276200/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475001567&sr=8-1&keywords=no+trail+behind+me