I've been looking through the links you've posted and... wow. I really kind of have no words.

I have to admit I've been doing a bit of boggling myself. I mean, I absolutely believe authors have the right to write what they'd like, but some of the arguments surrounding her decisions are really...startling.

I do wonder what's going through the mind of the author in question, though...

I just get the very squicky feeling that such a book will end up celebrating the myths of the nation while simultaneously deliberately ignoring the reality underneath. It's a sort of deliberate, disingenuous naivete that is very unattractive.

I might be totally wrong, but I don't read this genre and see no reason to start with this book.

...celebrating the myths of the nation while simultaneously deliberately ignoring the reality underneath.

You're exactly right. It's called co-opting, and it's a very dangerous form of racism because people don't even realize they're doing it. *sigh*

Huh. I didn't realize it had a name! That's good to know; I just knew it felt disturbing.

I once saw a schoolbook in New Mexico that erased Sitting Bull's entire period as a refugee in western Canada. The president just decided out of the blue not to fight with him anymore. I read this and was like, "Wow, this thing does away with an entire episode of injustice against American people, and erases my country as well! That's special!"

And deeply creepy.

Exactly! And how scary to think of all those kids who now take that timeline as "truth" because it was in a textbook! It's insidious.

It's all a bit strange (though, in a good way, it's called into question some of the stuff I was bringing to the table, which is not always a bad thing).

However....I forced myself to read the entire Twilight series because I felt if I was going to criticize it, I'd best know what I was talking about. In this case, I'm just not going to go there.

I forced myself to read the entire Twilight series because I felt if I was going to criticize it, I'd best know what I was talking about. In this case, I'm just not going to go there.

I'd say you've already suffered enough!

And... still thinking about this one. It squicks me tremendously on an instinctive level, so I think I'll leave the book alone.

I do read YA and I have read other books by Pat Wrede that I have loved to pieces. But not this one. No.



Edited at 2009-05-14 09:17 pm (UTC)

I've heard others say the same thing, that they've really loved Ms. Wrede's writing.

And gosh, YA has (IMO) some fantastically exciting things going on in it! (I didn't actually know this book was considered YA, so there you go...)

I love some YA (I don't read much fantasy aside from Terry Pratchett) but this one... okay, I spent five years as a teacher on a reserve up home, and although I am not an expert on First Nations issues stuff like this really pushes my buttons, probably because I have actual faces in mind when I think about Native people. Maybe Wrede doesn't, so she doesn't quite get that First Nations people are still *here.* Or something?

I dunno.

Yeah, I think anyone who's spend any time around reserve land knows that there is so much healing work still to be done - third world nations in our own country! - and yet, for some reason, it's really easy not to see First Nations people, or just dismiss them as dirty Indians. I think that's one of the reasons this wholesale erasure of a race is so problematic - had she said, I'm going to rewrite American history without any slaves, I wonder if this book would have seen the light of day. I don't know. Maybe it would have.

The thing is, racism exists everywhere. It exists within First Nation communities, as it exists in every community. There's no getting away from it because it's just part of being human. (Preaching to the converted here, I know!)

Anyhow, it's all a bit sad considering there's been some excellent fantasy YA recently that's been daring and unflinching - I highly recommend "How I Live Now" by Meg Rosoff and "The Hunger Games" by Suzanne Collins. There was also a really interesting fantasy book that come out a couple of years ago called "Benighted" that examined how insidious prejudice can be by using werewolves, of all things. I'm not a werewolf kind of reader, but this book did some really courageous things.

(And should you read any of these, I'd love to know what you think!)

This...would be one of my hot-button issues. I have a hard time discussing it without getting into it all-out, know what I mean?

So I will say that I agree with you - and what a tricky spot, vis-a-vis censorship. But I completely love your last paragraph.

I think it's one of those things that should trigger strong reactions and strong discussions!

I'm glad something I wrote resonated with you :)

you know that i support the discussion of any kind of examination...self or otherwise. it's important to do so. vastly important. no matter what the context, it's up to the reader to glean out what is there and how they feel.

i think you are right in examining this as you need to. :::hugs:::

Thank you. It's one of those "I can't look away" things. Which is important, I think, when one's a writer.

i think it's necessary to study warts :D

Warts. Yes.

Also, scabs. :D

I clicked on your links - and what a painful, misguided discussion. I was appalled at some of the things Lois McMaster Bujold wrote (she's one of my favorite authors) and I hope she will, as she promised, retreat for a while to think and reflect.

I have to say though that the RaceFail discussions have left a feeling of extreme worry in me. I am a Jewish woman from Eastern Europe, and have experienced first-hand not only antisemitism, but other kinds of ethnic/group intolerance and yes, violence. I also have two disabled people in my family. Naturally my writing gravitates towards the themes of Otherness. One of the main themes in my secondary world fantasy novel is race (not exactly though, more like species, but there is also a color difference involved). My MC (an antihero) is a racist, among other things. He is a very difficult person. I wanted to engage deeply and unflinchingly with those issues, but now I shudder to think what the reaction to this book would be. Who am I, really, to write about race? This worry is not the main reason why I stopped querying Otherblood, though it's certainly one of them. it's a non-PC book.

So what and how should I write? Should I only write about my own people, i.e. the Jews? Is there a way that I, a non-POC, can write persons of color?

Here's a more specific example. My current short story sequence is based in alternative Siberia between 14th and 16th centuries. In 16th century, Siberia was conquered by Russians, and many "small nations," i.e. indigenous Siberian people, had been destroyed or decimated. I am yet to write a story from the Russians' POV, but when I do, how can I *not* write their feelings - their hatred and disdain towards the indigenous people, and curiosity, and some attempts at understanding, but very little true respect? And when I, a non-POC, write that story from the Russians' POV, with those unsavory dominant feelings on the surface, will I or will I not come across at least slightly racist?

I am trained in linguistics, anthropology and folklore. I have studied the indigenous people I am writing about, and I have nothing but utmost respect and love for their languages and culture, and I'd love to see them better represented in our genre. I do not think I am racist. However, some of my characters are racist. Where does that leave me, a non-POC?

Thanks for your reply! I'm glad you did - I think discussing what's going with these RaceFail thingies is really important.

So what and how should I write? Should I only write about my own people, i.e. the Jews? Is there a way that I, a non-POC, can write persons of color?

This is something I've wondered about myself, because like you, I often write about what it means to be Other. Sometimes, I feel like someone's drawn all these neat lines and we have to stand on one side or the other, except, how do we do that? I know some of the more militant viewpoints on race seem to suggest this, and yet, when race and racism is such a huge part of everyone's history, I think stating that someone cannot write about it is wrong, too.

I think the difference, at least from where I am standing, is what you've written in that last paragraph - that you know the elements you're working with, and you're choosing to go there rather than turn away. This, to me, is part of my job description, because I've got racist characters and sexist characters and characters with a whole host of flaws too. And I have to tell their stories, because despite their flaws, they're also people (well, people in my mind, at least!).

So, I guess....do your best? I mean, that's all any of us can really do, I think. I might be wrong, but I rather suspect that Ms. Wrede did her best too - it seems to me, from what I've read, that most of the really painful comments have come from people surrounding her, rather from Ms. Wrede herself.

That being said, I am still quite shocked at how the whole scale exclusion of a group of people who have experienced such horrible persecution passed under so many people's noses without question. Maybe there were questions - I don't know....however....

So, I guess....do your best? I mean, that's all any of us can really do, I think.

Exactly. Try. Maybe fail. Examine what went wrong and try again.

Yup. Each and every day!

Well, you know, the great thing about using a third person perspective or an unreliable narrator is showing when the person whose POV you're writing from is wrong.

And as for the other issues, you might find the discussion here worth reading (which saves me copy-and-pasting the comment, heh).

Well, you know, the great thing about using a third person perspective or an unreliable narrator is showing when the person whose POV you're writing from is wrong.

I am not very keen on narrators who teach morals to the reader. Our modern-day American morals are not appropriate to any of my secondary worlds. What I was driving at, with the book, was to show how the MC is inappropriate in the context of his own world. The reader should figure out for herself or himself how that relates to our own universe. I think I did a good job - the readers were pleased - but I don't think I will ever sell it. If I ever have the burning desire to write another, it will most likely be a Jewish fantasy.

In response to the comment you linked to, I don't think that the question "what color people can I write about?" is either whiny or self-centered. It is precisely because I have to be sensitive on those issues that the question comes up at all. There are no easy answers. It is true that I have extensively studied the Siberian Yupik Eskimo and Chukchee people whose cultures I am drawing on for my current story series, but it is also true that I never lived among them or eaten their food.

I'm a bit confused why you think my sentence about 'unreliable narrator' means that a story/narrator should take a moral stance-- "The Telltale Heart" has an unreliable narrator who's clearly, er, wrong, but I'd hardly call it a didactic tale. I think we're both agreeing that looking over a character's shoulder is not the same as accepting his or her viewpoint as the reality of the situation.

And I guess I'm not sure what you're asking with the second question after all-- you can write about whoever you'd like, and will be criticized for things you get wrong. So it's been and so it shall ever be.

Not commenting on the rights or wrongs of the first debate.

Regarding this novel, I don't read the genre but I imagine I'd be pretty irritated if someone wrote an alternative fantasy "Ollie was Quite a Nice Bloke", where Cromwell comes into Drogheda and has a nice little picnic with corned beef sandwiches because there's nobody for him to fight.

Plus when she says "I wanted to eliminate the Native American stereotype", she seems to think the solution lies in eliminating the Native Americans.

Edited at 2009-05-14 09:48 pm (UTC)

Oh, the vision of Cromwell on a picnic!

But yes, I agree with you on both counts. I hadn't read that bottom one, and....yowza...

Here from linkspam.

I believe that any author should be able to write about whatever they choose, even if it means obliterating a race.

Me too. But I'm free to write whatever I choose about those choices-- just as you're doing. I'm free to not buy a book whose very premise pisses me off. I don't understand why so many people choose not to see that distinction.

(My grandparents were proudly "Part Indian," but had lost almost all details concerning tribe and actual ancestry. I think it's pretty common in the Northeast US.)

Edited to clarify what "Northeast" I was talking about.

Edited at 2009-05-15 02:51 pm (UTC)

Hello and welcome! (And chance you'd direct me to the link that brought you here? I'm just curious...)

And yes, I think it's really common for many of aboriginal ancestry to not know it, and what a shame it is that we have none of those roots. It's a little like a whole community of people have been orphaned and left wandering...

Anyhow, yes, I agree. This author chose to write what she has written, and many of us have said we will choose not to read her work. What I think is good is that because of this book, people are examining their opinions and beliefs (I know I have) which is always a good thing!

I am pretty sure I came from naraht.

I don't talk about it a lot, because it's nothing like the pervasive racism and poverty that many modern American Indian communities face. But it still kind of sucks.

It is. But it's a damn pity that this particular round of thinking comes from so much fail, and hurt a good number of people.

How many fantasy novels tend to have First Nations characters in them?

I think, had she created a whole new world and done everything else virtually the same, very few people would have even noticed. This happens all the time; the difference is that she made it obvious.

(Unrelated and far more frivolous second question: HOW THE HELL ARE THE SEVENTH SON AND THE THIRTEENTH CHILD TWINS?)

I always appreciate your frivolous questions!

And yep, she could have avoided all of this had she created her own world. Someone in another blog pointed out that part of this uproar is the result of sheer laziness on behalf of the author, and her own comments about why she chose to unwrite First Nations smacks of that (along with a host of other things!).

Anyhow. I don't know the answer to your first question - I'd suspect there are some, but not many. I have a link in my bookmarks about First Nations in fantasy, but I haven't been able to find it. Would you like me to pass it along when I do?

Not enough!

Yeah. Or she could have told a different story, with the indigenous inhabitants working with the Europeans in a way other than genocide, which would have been pretty interesting.

(Seven boys, thirteen kids altogether, I'd assume-- fraternal twins, the boy came out first.)

Sure, make sense. (In retrospect, I don't know how I made the son vs. child mistake. In my defense, I'm sometimes very dumb.)

(I had to think about it, don't worry.)

Well-said.