I'm here today on the blog to pose a question I've found naggingly absent from all the recent discussions on diversity in books.
Even IF non-marginalized authors "get the representation right" .. should they be the ones writing it?
To what extent is this helping diverse books at the expense of diverse authors?
Is there a difference between writing a diverse cast of characters and writing a diverse MC? Between writing realistic vs. sci-fi/fantasy?
Okay. Bear with me a bit. I want to unpack that a little more. And I want us to discuss. I feel like it's a question that too often gets skirted around, and those who try to suggest that the answer might be something we don't want to hear? They're often run off the internet.
But this is too important a topic to ignore.
We need to discuss it. And I really hope that some of you'll do so in the Comments section of this blog post. I want to hear your stories and your opinions! It's also important to me that this be a space to share your perspectives without fear of having your own twitter/tumblr etc filled with people attacking you for your opinions. So please feel free to comment anonymously.
Before we discuss, let's unpack:
There's an enormous diversity gap in literature. Very few books are published each year featuring Main Characters who are natives or persons of color, who are disabled, or are LGBTQIA+, who live with mental illness, or are members of marginalized cultures/religions. This is a problem. We need diverse books. But what do we do about it?
As readers, educators, and social media-lites, the answer is clear: we read and promote more stories featuring traditionally marginalized characters. We help expand the market.
But we're also writers, and the writer side of us wants to help too.
So naturally, our first instinct (if we feel confident enough about our ability to do the work needed for this), is to write books featuring non-white, disabled, LGBTQIA+, mentally ill, and/or otherwise marginalized or diverse protagonists. Even when we, ourselves, are not these things.
Because do we really need another story with a straight, white, abled protagonist? Not really, right?
Because the end goal is to get more books on the shelves with diverse protagonists. Right?
More mirrors for those who haven't had them and more windows for the rest of us.
More opportunities for a child to see themselves in a story.
Stop me if this sounds familiar.
Often, the first thing we ask when deciding to write outside our lane is How? How do we do this well? How do we get the representation right? In fact, I wrote a very long blog post on one aspect of this topic:
But there is still the one question I keep coming back to, something only skirted around in all this discussion. And that is this:
Even if we "get it right" ...
Even IF we do our research
Even IF we hire sensitivity readers
Even IF we aren't being tokenistic, don't culturally appropriate, or fall into lazy stereotypes
Even IF we work so hard and we "get the representation right"*
{ *or at least "good enough" ... assuming, as someone pointed out,
that this is even possible, which is probably a topic for another blog post!! }
Are we really helping?
As we know, Publishing is Overwhelmingly White, Female, Cishet, and Abled.
We also are becoming increasingly aware that it's likely precisely because of this that marginalized authors often hear "your work is not a good fit" because editors "just don't identify with the character."
Agents can only sign so many new authors a year. Editors only acquire so many books.
We know that they don't sign things that are "too similar to other projects on their list."
Historically, publishing houses have been hesitant to acquire many works with diverse MCs { though I hope, hope this is shifting??! }
Whites already write most of the books featuring protagonists of color. If "we" -- non-marginalized authors -- write "outside our lane" and submit those works to agents and publishing houses, are we helping the cause of diverse books, or:
Or are we simply taking up #ownvoices' seats at the table?
Whew. I typed it.
You can see why it's hard to talk about this.
Are there situations where it is more helpful? More hurtful?
Are there situations, stories, and genres where non-marginalized authors writing "outside their lanes" is more helpful? Less helpful?
For example:
- A Contemporary "Issue Book" vs. A Contemporary "Fun Book"
- Contemporary/Historical vs. Sci-Fi/Fantasy
- Writing a diverse cast of characters, but not the MC
- Marginalized perspectives that are very rare (book-wise and author-wise) vs.
Marginalized perspectives that have a lot of #ownvoices ready to tell their story already
In which situations are we helping by "writing outside our lane"? In which situations are we actually just hurting #ownvoices?
Okay. That's a lot to think about. Honestly guys ... I just don't know anymore. Am I overthinking this? Underthinking this? That's why I want us to discuss. If you want to read some more before jumping into the discussion, here are some links to other articles:
Further Reading:
Please keep in mind that many of these posts/threads are old articles.
The original posters likely don't have time to engage in new conversations about them
Be respectful of their time and read/listen only.
Apologies in advance. For many of these articles, the bits most directly relevant to the current discussion may be buried. That's part of the reason I want to have this discussion. I don't see it being discussed enough:
Why I'm Not Writing POC POV Anymore || "I Just Don't Identify with the Character" || Your Manuscript is "Not A Good Fit" || "Well, we Already Have One Black Writer on our list ..." || Reasons NOT to || Dear White Writers: Just Because WNDB, Doesn't Mean YOU should write them || "The Burden Can't Just Fall to Writers of Color" || "We Published Lesbian Last Issue" || Speaking Out About the State of Diversity in Publishing || Who is "We?" -- & "Already have a Korean-American Writer" || Diversity is Not Enough -- "What if they don't get what I'm doing?" and "We didn't Connect with the Character" || What's in a Number -- Or ... What Happens if we wait for change to happen "organically" || Narrow-Minded Marketing & How White People Can Respond || "There are quotas in effect -- literally" || "It is infinitely harder for the work of POC to be heard/seen/recognized in the marketplace" || White Writers: Don't Write Diverse Books. Read Them. || "We Don't Relate to the Character" -- It's not yours to relate to! ||
Must-Read Twitter Threads on this Topic:Please keep in mind that these threads are dated.
The original posters likely don't have time to engage in new conversations about them.
Be respectful of their time and read/listen only.
When NOT to
Write-In-Your Lane: Differences between New vs. Established Authors & Marginalized vs. Non-Marg
So. Let's Discuss:
Note: I would like to keep these comments open and unmoderated for people to express their full thoughts and feelings on this (the exception being that spam / off-topic material will be removed).
Because of this, I'm not asking anyone to play nice. I do ask that if you're about to post something that could be construed as aggressive or rude, you think about the effectiveness of your argumentation techniques, but I don't want you to feel restricted. It's a tough and potentially heated topic. Feel welcome to post your comments anonymously, if that's more comfortable for you.
tl;dr? Please let's not tone police or derail here.
The Questions Again:
b. Contemporary/Historical vs. Sci-Fi/Fantasy
c. Writing a diverse cast of characters, but not the MC
d. Marginalizations that are very rare (book-wise and author-wise) vs.
Marginalized perspectives that have a lot of #ownvoices ready to tell their story already
 |
| Even if we get the representation right, should we write the other? { image : pixabay } |
Even IF non-marginalized authors "get the representation right" .. should they be the ones writing it?
To what extent is this helping diverse books at the expense of diverse authors?
Is there a difference between writing a diverse cast of characters and writing a diverse MC? Between writing realistic vs. sci-fi/fantasy?
Okay. Bear with me a bit. I want to unpack that a little more. And I want us to discuss. I feel like it's a question that too often gets skirted around, and those who try to suggest that the answer might be something we don't want to hear? They're often run off the internet.
But this is too important a topic to ignore.
We need to discuss it. And I really hope that some of you'll do so in the Comments section of this blog post. I want to hear your stories and your opinions! It's also important to me that this be a space to share your perspectives without fear of having your own twitter/tumblr etc filled with people attacking you for your opinions. So please feel free to comment anonymously.
Before we discuss, let's unpack:
There's an enormous diversity gap in literature. Very few books are published each year featuring Main Characters who are natives or persons of color, who are disabled, or are LGBTQIA+, who live with mental illness, or are members of marginalized cultures/religions. This is a problem. We need diverse books. But what do we do about it?
As readers, educators, and social media-lites, the answer is clear: we read and promote more stories featuring traditionally marginalized characters. We help expand the market.
But we're also writers, and the writer side of us wants to help too.
So naturally, our first instinct (if we feel confident enough about our ability to do the work needed for this), is to write books featuring non-white, disabled, LGBTQIA+, mentally ill, and/or otherwise marginalized or diverse protagonists. Even when we, ourselves, are not these things.
Because do we really need another story with a straight, white, abled protagonist? Not really, right?
Because the end goal is to get more books on the shelves with diverse protagonists. Right?
More mirrors for those who haven't had them and more windows for the rest of us.
More opportunities for a child to see themselves in a story.
Stop me if this sounds familiar.
Often, the first thing we ask when deciding to write outside our lane is How? How do we do this well? How do we get the representation right? In fact, I wrote a very long blog post on one aspect of this topic:
Even if we "get it right" ...
Even IF we do our research
Even IF we hire sensitivity readers
Even IF we aren't being tokenistic, don't culturally appropriate, or fall into lazy stereotypes
Even IF we work so hard and we "get the representation right"*
{ *or at least "good enough" ... assuming, as someone pointed out,
that this is even possible, which is probably a topic for another blog post!! }
Are we really helping?
As we know, Publishing is Overwhelmingly White, Female, Cishet, and Abled.
We also are becoming increasingly aware that it's likely precisely because of this that marginalized authors often hear "your work is not a good fit" because editors "just don't identify with the character."
Agents can only sign so many new authors a year. Editors only acquire so many books.
We know that they don't sign things that are "too similar to other projects on their list."
Historically, publishing houses have been hesitant to acquire many works with diverse MCs { though I hope, hope this is shifting??! }
Whites already write most of the books featuring protagonists of color. If "we" -- non-marginalized authors -- write "outside our lane" and submit those works to agents and publishing houses, are we helping the cause of diverse books, or:
Or are we simply taking up #ownvoices' seats at the table?
- Are we effectively "elbowing in" on a slot an agent's client list or a publishing house's acquisitions plan that could have gone to a marginalized writer?
- Are we getting a story into the hands of a reader who needs to see themselves represented NOW, or are we mostly just vying for a seat at a table that isn't really ours anyway?
Whew. I typed it.
You can see why it's hard to talk about this.
Are there situations where it is more helpful? More hurtful?
Are there situations, stories, and genres where non-marginalized authors writing "outside their lanes" is more helpful? Less helpful?
For example:
- A Contemporary "Issue Book" vs. A Contemporary "Fun Book"
- Contemporary/Historical vs. Sci-Fi/Fantasy
- Writing a diverse cast of characters, but not the MC
- Marginalized perspectives that are very rare (book-wise and author-wise) vs.
Marginalized perspectives that have a lot of #ownvoices ready to tell their story already
In which situations are we helping by "writing outside our lane"? In which situations are we actually just hurting #ownvoices?
Okay. That's a lot to think about. Honestly guys ... I just don't know anymore. Am I overthinking this? Underthinking this? That's why I want us to discuss. If you want to read some more before jumping into the discussion, here are some links to other articles:
Further Reading:
Please keep in mind that many of these posts/threads are old articles.
The original posters likely don't have time to engage in new conversations about them
Be respectful of their time and read/listen only.
Apologies in advance. For many of these articles, the bits most directly relevant to the current discussion may be buried. That's part of the reason I want to have this discussion. I don't see it being discussed enough:
Why I'm Not Writing POC POV Anymore || "I Just Don't Identify with the Character" || Your Manuscript is "Not A Good Fit" || "Well, we Already Have One Black Writer on our list ..." || Reasons NOT to || Dear White Writers: Just Because WNDB, Doesn't Mean YOU should write them || "The Burden Can't Just Fall to Writers of Color" || "We Published Lesbian Last Issue" || Speaking Out About the State of Diversity in Publishing || Who is "We?" -- & "Already have a Korean-American Writer" || Diversity is Not Enough -- "What if they don't get what I'm doing?" and "We didn't Connect with the Character" || What's in a Number -- Or ... What Happens if we wait for change to happen "organically" || Narrow-Minded Marketing & How White People Can Respond || "There are quotas in effect -- literally" || "It is infinitely harder for the work of POC to be heard/seen/recognized in the marketplace" || White Writers: Don't Write Diverse Books. Read Them. || "We Don't Relate to the Character" -- It's not yours to relate to! ||
Must-Read Twitter Threads on this Topic:Please keep in mind that these threads are dated.
The original posters likely don't have time to engage in new conversations about them.
Be respectful of their time and read/listen only.
When NOT to
Write-In-Your Lane: Differences between New vs. Established Authors & Marginalized vs. Non-Marg
So. Let's Discuss:
Note: I would like to keep these comments open and unmoderated for people to express their full thoughts and feelings on this (the exception being that spam / off-topic material will be removed).
Because of this, I'm not asking anyone to play nice. I do ask that if you're about to post something that could be construed as aggressive or rude, you think about the effectiveness of your argumentation techniques, but I don't want you to feel restricted. It's a tough and potentially heated topic. Feel welcome to post your comments anonymously, if that's more comfortable for you.
tl;dr? Please let's not tone police or derail here.
The Questions Again:
- Even IF non-marginalized authors "get the rep right"... How much are we/they really helping?
- To what extent does writing the other help diverse books at the expense of diverse authors? (By taking up #ownvoices' seats at the table)
- Are there situations where "writing outside your lane" is more helpful? More hurtful?
For example:
b. Contemporary/Historical vs. Sci-Fi/Fantasy
c. Writing a diverse cast of characters, but not the MC
d. Marginalizations that are very rare (book-wise and author-wise) vs.
Marginalized perspectives that have a lot of #ownvoices ready to tell their story already
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Please feel free to post your comments anonymously.
Please feel free to post your comments anonymously.
Post a Comment