Use of politically incorrect phrases

still alive · Jun 15, 2009

In an historical novel, how "dangerous" to publication chances is it to use what was common phrasing or words in the time period being written about?

If today they are politically incorrect or even explosive to certain groups?

What should an historical writer be true to (and still realistically expect publication)--the time period of the novel, or today's restrictions?

pdr · Jun 15, 2009

Ah, like...

nigger and poofter, spastic, whore etc?

Make it work. If your slave owning plantation owner would say nigger boy then he says it!

In context it should work.

still alive · Jun 15, 2009

Ah, but pdr, there's the rub! "Should" work, but what about agents' sensitivities? Or Editors'?

The trick is how to know if you're stumbling towards quicksand. And after struggling to write 100,000 words only to have the politically correct bugbear suddenly loom, is unsettling to put it mildly!
sa

tallus83 · Jun 15, 2009

Political correctness started with the Clintons, and is really not practiced by the rest of the world.

Use the words of the time period you are writing about.

Admiral Bull Halsey once said 'Kill the Yellow Bastards!" Doesn't quite sound the same as "Kill those oriental people of unknown parentage!"

Fokker Aeroplanbau · Jun 15, 2009

Don't go down the road in which we have censored Orwell's 1984 or Mark Twain books overlooked because he has potentially racially 'insentivite' remarks.

Be bold.

Haggis · Jun 15, 2009

tallus83 said:
Political correctness started with the Clintons, and is really not practiced by the rest of the world.

Use the words of the time period you are writing about.

Admiral Bull Halsey once said 'Kill the Yellow Bastards!" Doesn't quite sound the same as "Kill those ~~oriental~~ Asian people of unknown parentage!"

Fixed it for you.

eta: If your book is about a particular period in time when certain words were common, you better be using those certain words or no one will buy into it.

pdr · Jun 16, 2009

Seriously...

you make it work.

You take your reader into that period of history and let them experience it as it was, as far as you have created it using your research and writing talent.

One of the things readers like in the historical novel is the occasional shock of experiencing what it was like then.

calley · Jun 16, 2009

still alive said:
In an historical novel, how "dangerous" to publication chances is it to use what was common phrasing or words in the time period being written about?

If today they are politically incorrect or even explosive to certain groups?

What should an historical writer be true to (and still realistically expect publication)--the time period of the novel, or today's restrictions?

If you're making some point with the language, leave it in.

If it's just there to be there, cut it down/trim it out. It's the same as putting swear words in novels set in modern times: you can. And there's a valid argument for that being realistic. At the same time, though, it's not necessary; unless it's serving a purpose, use your l33t author skillz to find a different way to say things. Littering a novel with words that might offend x-or-y can be a silly practice, since it can detract from whatever your real message is.

Puma · Jun 16, 2009

Historical fiction should be an accurate glimpse into the past. Changing words because they might be offensive to someone is not an accurate glimpse into the past. If we start worrying about political correctness in historical, are we also going to start worrying about words that might be offensive to someone in other genres - or in everyday speech? If we are, we're going to be losing the majority of our expletives and even "cute descriptors". I once had someone take offense to my calling a two year old "silly". Someone who wants to be offended will take offense regardless of what you write; so why try to avoid it. If you do try, you'll end up writing pablum. Puma

scarletpeaches · Jun 16, 2009

still alive said:
Ah, but pdr, there's the rub! "Should" work, but what about agents' sensitivities? Or Editors'?

The trick is how to know if you're stumbling towards quicksand. And after struggling to write 100,000 words only to have the politically correct bugbear suddenly loom, is unsettling to put it mildly!
sa

So what about agents' and editors' sensitivities?

Do you want your novel to have the ring of truth or to sound like it's a bunch of politically correct people somehow transported to the deep South in the late nineteenth century?

I'd throw a novel across the room if it wasn't true to the time period. Language and all.

calley · Jun 16, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
a bunch of politically correct people somehow transported to the deep South in the late nineteenth century

Coming soon to a theater near you. Staring Eddie Murphy and the sparkles from Twilight.

xhouseboy · Jun 16, 2009

still alive said:
Ah, but pdr, there's the rub! "Should" work, but what about agents' sensitivities? Or Editors'?

The trick is how to know if you're stumbling towards quicksand. And after struggling to write 100,000 words only to have the politically correct bugbear suddenly loom, is unsettling to put it mildly!
sa

I don't see any 'rub', to be perfectly honest. And you could actually be imagining stumbling blocks where none exist.

Unless these agents and editors of whom you speak are in the market for historically inaccurate novels, then I don't think you've a problem.

Saint Fool · Jun 16, 2009

I would think that publishers who buy historicals would expect to see the language of the time and would not have their editors focus on politically correct language. CAUTION: this may not apply to "historical" romances with hot monkey sex.

George MacDonald Frasier's (sp? I've loaned out my copies) Flashman series uses the language of the time (1840s - 1870s) to great effect. On the other hand, Naomi Novick's AUH Temeraire series, although she does get the attitudes of the time correct, shys away from using the slurs of the time. (A weakness in the series which I forgive because I loves me a good dragon story.)

Go for it!

(PS - not to derail the thread, but PC existed long before the Clintons and and before conservatives decided that it was a "liberal" tool. If I remember correctly, I first heard the phrase in the mid-seventies in connection with the feminist movement. The more historical documents I read, the more PC language I've found on all parts of the political spectrum.)

.

angeliz2k · Jun 16, 2009

Well, there's plenty of political incorrectness in contemporary novels, in movies, and on t.v., especially the HBO/MAX/SHO series. Audiences realize that people aren't politically correct and that is just how the world works. There was no such thing as political correctness fifty, a hundred, a thousand years ago, so don't try to pussy-foot around it. You're doing no one any favors if you do. You can choose to minimize the effect, but trying to overlay 21st-century morals on historical characters is not going to fly.

Besides, if one agent is put off by an offensive word, then another will not be, and that first agent wouldn't be the right one for that manuscript.

RichardB · Jun 16, 2009

I have strong women characters in my books because women are strong. The men in my books don't expect this because men didn't expect women to be strong in the 9th century. Now and again someone uses a word we don't much use nowadays, like "Jewess" or "Saracen." But my voice makes it quite clear that no one has a monopoly on virtue, or on evil.

archerjoe · Jun 16, 2009

I really enjoyed Sea of Poppies by Amitav Ghosh. The language fits the period, warts and all.

Ken · Jun 16, 2009

... incorrect phrases are similar to rape and murder scenes, discussed here just recently. If their gratuitously sprinkled into a novel without much rhyme or reason, editors and agents may well be turned off and write you off as some sort of twisted sicko. But if the scenes and phrases are called upon in the narrative and are there for a reason then no one is going to be offended, unless they're excessively uptight about such topics, like me. So go ahead and write your novel as the time period in which it is set demands. G'luck.

still alive · Jun 16, 2009

Just to prove how new I am to AW, I posted--or rather wrote--a long reply and then I pushed the wrong key or something and it disappeared!

So short version: I thank all of you! You're great. And you're telling me what I wanted to hear. I think I may have mis-said "historical" not being sure of the perimeters. My novel is set in 1922. I consider that at least semi-historical.

And my use of the PinC words are strictly in dialogue. Maybe the bad thing is that they are in the very beginning of Chapter One, when all the reader has had to go on [as to the period] is some "atmospheric" narrative description. So maybe I need to change the order of my chapters.

I know I'm preaching to the choir when I say that structure and the beginning are hard!

So while I'm here, is there such a thing as a literate[ary?] multi-generational historical that only has the first 3 chpts. as the multi and the rest of the book in the same later time period? I.e.: 1856 then 1922? Or should I just use historical and let it go?

Sometimes this demand upon us to classify our books gets to be a real pain, IMO!
SA

angeliz2k · Jun 16, 2009

still alive said:
Just to prove how new I am to AW, I posted--or rather wrote--a long reply and then I pushed the wrong key or something and it disappeared!

So short version: I thank all of you! You're great. And you're telling me what I wanted to hear. I think I may have mis-said "historical" not being sure of the perimeters. My novel is set in 1922. I consider that at least semi-historical.

And my use of the PinC words are strictly in dialogue. Maybe the bad thing is that they are in the very beginning of Chapter One, when all the reader has had to go on [as to the period] is some "atmospheric" narrative description. So maybe I need to change the order of my chapters.

I know I'm preaching to the choir when I say that structure and the beginning are hard!

So while I'm here, is there such a thing as a literate[ary?] multi-generational historical that only has the first 3 chpts. as the multi and the rest of the book in the same later time period? I.e.: 1856 then 1922? Or should I just use historical and let it go?

Sometimes this demand upon us to classify our books gets to be a real pain, IMO!
SA

WELCOME! Don't be shy, we don't bite (much).

And 1922 counts as historical. The sixties is borderline territory, but I think the twenties are safely "historical". With the timing you describe (1850's and 1920's), you'd be classified under historical.

Steam&Ink · Jun 16, 2009

Hey, let's not mistake what political correctness is:
PC is what's acceptable to our modern ears right now, in the modern world. What is PC today will probably not be PC in twenty years. So it's completely subjective.
While I am all for PC in this modern world (I would never use words like "nigger" or "Jewess"), it is historically incorrect to pretend that things weren't different in the past: They would also have had their version of PC, and also have blithely said things like "nigger" and "Jewess"...
If it suits the context, and is not gratuitous, then you should use the language of the time.

tallus83 · Jun 20, 2009

If you write a story about the 1930's or '40's, as an example, and use today's language instead of the language used during that time period, especially in dialogue, then your work would basically just be fiction and not really historical fiction.

Why, because you've mucked about with what really happened and changed it to suit your opinions. During the above stated period, and it really is the best axample though I do hate to use it, in the US there were no African-Americans, they were called Negroes or Nigger. Even if you hate those words, you would have to use them to be historically accurate.

Sirius · Jun 21, 2009

tallus83 said:
If you write a story about the 1930's or '40's, as an example, and use today's language instead of the language used during that time period, especially in dialogue, then your work would basically just be fiction and not really historical fiction.

Why, because you've mucked about with what really happened and changed it to suit your opinions. During the above stated period, and it really is the best axample though I do hate to use it, in the US there were no African-Americans, they were called Negroes or Nigger. Even if you hate those words, you would have to use them to be historically accurate.

Well, adjusted for who was speaking. In Gentlemen Prefer Blondes by Anita Loos (published 1925) the heroine, Lorelei Lee, wants her maid Lulu to read Lord Jim for her so she can summarise the plot to allow Lorelei to talk about the book to the intellectual admirer who has insisted on lending Lorelei the complete works of Conrad to broader her mind, but as Lorelei explains, "When I got her the book I nearly made a mistake and gave her a book by the title of 'The Nigger of the Narcissus' which really would have hurt her feelings. I mean, I do not know why authors cannot say 'Negro' instead of 'Nigger' as they have their feelings just the same as we have."

Not only is this a neat example of how the discussion in this thread highlights a dilemma which has existed for authors for a long, long time it also shows how one generation's "polite" usage rapidly becomes the next generation's unacceptable usage, so in using particular terms you have to work out not only what was current at the time but what was current and acceptable for the person you're depicting.

History_Chick · Jun 21, 2009

As a reader I want authenticity. I don't want a plantation owner saying "African American" when talking to one of their slaves.

Could you get into trouble with it? Eh, maybe. Although I've seen it before and I think that a good agent and publisher won't chastise you for it. I say go for it. If the agent is really uncomfortable with it I guess they'll ask you to change it.

I'm writing a book set during the Civil War...I dont hold any punches.

DeleyanLee · Jun 21, 2009

Barbara Hambly's Benjamin January series takes place in the 1800's and Benjamin is a freed slave. The way she handles it is that the people she doesn't want the readers to like uses the non-PC words, phrases and attitudes. It's a very effective technique, I think.

DMarie84 · Jun 25, 2009

I say use the language. It's about historcial accuracy.

You better believe my half American/half Japanese MC would hear all sorts of slurs towards her in 1890s Japan and not just from the Euro/American side.

Use of politically incorrect phrases

still alive

practical experience, FTW

pdr

still alive

practical experience, FTW

tallus83

Fokker Aeroplanbau

Haggis

Evil, undead Chihuahua

pdr

calley

Puma

Retired and loving it!

scarletpeaches

calley

xhouseboy

In the Yellow Woods

Saint Fool

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

RichardB

THIS! IS!! VENNNNNICE!!!!

archerjoe

Ken

still alive

practical experience, FTW

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

Steam&Ink

sekrit superhero

tallus83

Sirius

History_Chick

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

DMarie84

I wish I had a time machine