I found this on the eHarlequin website under what editors hate (or something like that), and I got a bit worried:
"I work on Historicals a fair amount, and I'm not the most PC person in the world, but each time I review a manuscript that calls a half-Native American/half-white man a 'half-breed' it gets immediately rejected. To me it is not only an indicator that the writer doesn't care about the mixed hero, but also that their writing probably isn't going to reflect any sort of modern sensibility [thus appeal]."
Now, my theory had been that if you are writing from a certain character's perspective (close 3rd person POV or first person) that you need to describe people as that character would. So if the heroine knows the hero is half-NA/half German, she might think of him as a half-breed.
i.e.: I saw him again, sitting at the corner table, chewing a wad of tobacco. A worthless half-breed. I wanted nothing to do with him.
And in my story set in the 16th century, the characters use the term "man" or "mankind," not "human" or "humankind" or "people" to refer all homo sapiens, regardless of gender. Women haven't reached equallity yet in my story's time. The double standard on sexual activity exists and is a factor in my plot.
And if you are using a narrator I think that you might or might not use politically incorrect terms depending on how who your narrator is. An omni- God-like narrator had better be sensitive, but a narrator like Lemony Snickett, who is a de facto character of the Series of Unfortunate Events story, might not be.
So are we supposed to write historically accurate viewpoints or bow to "modern" sensibility/appeal?
I'd love to hear from people who have had conversations with editors on this subject.
Thank you.
"I work on Historicals a fair amount, and I'm not the most PC person in the world, but each time I review a manuscript that calls a half-Native American/half-white man a 'half-breed' it gets immediately rejected. To me it is not only an indicator that the writer doesn't care about the mixed hero, but also that their writing probably isn't going to reflect any sort of modern sensibility [thus appeal]."
Now, my theory had been that if you are writing from a certain character's perspective (close 3rd person POV or first person) that you need to describe people as that character would. So if the heroine knows the hero is half-NA/half German, she might think of him as a half-breed.
i.e.: I saw him again, sitting at the corner table, chewing a wad of tobacco. A worthless half-breed. I wanted nothing to do with him.
And in my story set in the 16th century, the characters use the term "man" or "mankind," not "human" or "humankind" or "people" to refer all homo sapiens, regardless of gender. Women haven't reached equallity yet in my story's time. The double standard on sexual activity exists and is a factor in my plot.
And if you are using a narrator I think that you might or might not use politically incorrect terms depending on how who your narrator is. An omni- God-like narrator had better be sensitive, but a narrator like Lemony Snickett, who is a de facto character of the Series of Unfortunate Events story, might not be.
So are we supposed to write historically accurate viewpoints or bow to "modern" sensibility/appeal?
I'd love to hear from people who have had conversations with editors on this subject.
Thank you.
This is a very interesting debate. Good thread!
