AW Amazon Store

If this site is helpful to you,
Please consider a voluntary subscription to defray ongoing expenses.


 

Welcome to the AbsoluteWrite Water Cooler! Please read The Newbie Guide To Absolute Write

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 417

Thread: Victoria Foyt's novel coming under fire...

  1. #151
    Worst song played on ugliest guitar Libbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    umber and black Humberland
    Posts
    5,309
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    I don't think coal is actually a racial slur. It's more one of the things *very* dark skin people get called disparagingly.
    Which would make it...a slur. Who cares if it's only some people within an ethnic group who get called that particular word? If it's being used to denigrate somebody because of their ethnicity, it's a racial slur.

    All that aside, though, I don't understand why no one can ever use the term "coal-black" to describe something that's a matte black because the word "coal" is also used as a racial slur. Coal is an object, pretty darn common, that many readers can immediately relate another object's appearance to if it's described as coal-black. Describing shoes or a book's cover or whatever as coal-black...I guess I don't see how that's as offensive as referring to a PERSON (as in this book) as a Coal. I realize this is probably my white privilege talking. I'm trying to understand the difference better so I don't accidentally write something that will offend.

    Let me see if I can try to clarify the difficulty I'm having in understanding the difference: I see calling a person "coal" as extremely offensive. I don't understand why "coal-black" as an object descriptor offends, because coal is always the word that's been used for this substance. It's not a word that was invented to segregate or harm people, although it has been co-opted for that use in addition to its still-legitimate use to name that stuff we burn for energy. I can understand why describing, say, a pair of shoes as "pickaninny-black" would be very offensive -- not only does it use an established slur, a word that can only be taken as offensive, but it lowers an entire ethnicity of people to a mere object descriptor, thus dehumanizing them even further, as if the word itself weren't bad enough. I guess I am not understanding why it's not okay to use one object to compare another object. Object to compare human being, I see the offense in that. Terrible word for a human being to compare object, I see the offense there, too. I guess I'm not understanding what it is about "coal" as a mere word that makes it de facto offensive in all adjectival uses.

    Can anybody help me understand this better? I really want to understand this. I'd be mortified if I accidentally wrote something that could be taken as an offense to people.
    Last edited by Libbie; 07-30-2012 at 07:42 PM.

  2. #152
    On a wing and a prayer aruna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A Small Town in Germany
    Posts
    12,704
    Quote Originally Posted by scottken View Post
    One of the best reviews of the book's failed premise I found so far is on Spacehawk's livejournal (publisher of the magazine Expanded Horizons), explains how reverse-discrimination stories are not allowed per their submission guidelines. She says it far better than I could:

    .

    Great post! Thanks!
    OUT NOW!
    The Lost Daughter of India
    Amazon UK:

    Amazon US:

    Sons of Gods -- the Mahabharata

    Website
    Facebook


    Do you know what you are? You are a manuscript of a divine letter. You are a mirror reflecting a noble face. This universe is not outside of you. Look inside yourself; everything that you want, you are already that ...
    ~ Rumi

  3. #153
    Sophipygian AW Moderator Alessandra Kelley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    14,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Katrina S. Forest View Post
    I hope the mainstream sources are at least noting that it's self-published. It makes a big difference whether you're talking about one person's misjudgement or that of an entire group of people who are supposed to know the book business and care about what sort of image their products are putting out.
    It's not obvious that it's self-published. The publisher's site goes out of its way to obscure that. It implies it has other books (which don't exist) and uses a corporate "we."
    Sand Dollar Press, Inc. is an independent publisher of fiction for young adults and women. We specialize in quality novels in the areas of science fiction, mystery and romance.
    Medievalist noted that its ISBN betrays it as a self-published book.

    One would have to dig a little to discover that it is self-published.

  4. #154
    sleeping the sleep of the sleepless Mayfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    my own private Idaho
    Posts
    294
    Libbie, I certainly don't think "coal-black" as a color descriptor is offensive in and of itself...I think it's when the term is used as a way to emphasize how evil/ugly/menacing something is that it has the ability to make people feel uncomfortable due historical negative associations of the phrase with skin color. So, "I bought a pair of coal-black shoes" is fine. But "They were ugliest shoes I'd ever seen. Coal black and filthy. I wouldn't be caught dead in trash like that." might be taken to have a certain racial subtext. I hope that makes sense!
    CHARM & STRANGE (St. Martin's Griffin, 2013)
    COMPLICIT (St. Martin's Griffin, 2014)
    DELICATE MONSTERS (St. Martin's Griffin, 2015)



    Blog | Twitter | YA Highway

  5. #155
    On a wing and a prayer aruna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A Small Town in Germany
    Posts
    12,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Libbie View Post

    Can anybody help me understand this better? I really want to understand this. I'd be mortified if I accidentally wrote something that could be taken as an offense to people.
    Hi Libbie,
    I'm not sure if I'm the right one to aswer this because I don't really ever get offended by racial slurs -- I used to get hurt by them, then I got angry by them, and now I just want to give the person who uses them deliberately a good slap shake and tell them to wake up and smell the coffee. A person who used coal-black as a description of a flying monkey -- wouldn't bother me, even if that monkey were evil. I understand that some people would be bothered, though. Not even using some food names (coffee, caramel) to describe skin colour bothers me -- for instance, in Guyana a common adjective for brown skin is "sapodilla brown". I am sapodilla brown. Sapodilla is a delicious fruit, and its colour is exactly right for many of us. I would certainly use it in Guyana. If I knew my book was to be published in the US and that AA's are offended by fruit names -- well, I would think twice. But it would be a shame, because it is such a gorgeous word! This is sapodilla-brown.

    To me, the Coal vs Pearl thing is so obvious I would indeed like to give VF a slap shake. It isn't even a metaphor. It's a blatant, in-your-face, mind-boggingly literal value allocation. Even a child could interpret the meaning. Give a three year old the choice between playing with coal and pearls -- and, well she'll pick the coal, because it's so wonderfully dirty! (This happened to me when I was baby-sitting my best friend's daughter once -- she was sleeping in a room with a coal-burning (but cold) stove, woke up, opened the stove, removed several handfulls of soot, and when I next saw her she was indeed -- in blackface!) (Soot -- now that's another name VF could have called the Coals!)

    So I don't know what to tell you. Taking offence is a very subjective matter. I would not want to hurt anyone's feelings, but you never know and I think as writers if we are sensitive and caring we WILL get it mostly right, without having to walk on eggshells or lay each word on a gold scale. I think responsible writers need not worry too much. Trust your good sense. Listen to what feels right. I think you'll do OK -- by the very fact that you asked.

    I wonder how many POC VF asked to beta-read her book?
    Last edited by aruna; 07-30-2012 at 09:09 PM.
    OUT NOW!
    The Lost Daughter of India
    Amazon UK:

    Amazon US:

    Sons of Gods -- the Mahabharata

    Website
    Facebook


    Do you know what you are? You are a manuscript of a divine letter. You are a mirror reflecting a noble face. This universe is not outside of you. Look inside yourself; everything that you want, you are already that ...
    ~ Rumi

  6. #156
    Worst song played on ugliest guitar Libbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    umber and black Humberland
    Posts
    5,309
    Thanks, Mayfield and Aruna!

  7. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by Alessandra Kelley View Post
    It's not obvious that it's self-published. The publisher's site goes out of its way to obscure that. It implies it has other books (which don't exist) and uses a corporate "we."

    Medievalist noted that its ISBN betrays it as a self-published book.

    One would have to dig a little to discover that it is self-published.
    Ah, I missed that the first read-through. Thanks for clarifying.
    "An honest answer is like a warm hug." - Proverbs 24:26 (The Message)

    My short story collection, "The Poisoned City", is now available!

  8. #158
    You can't sit with us! missesdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Libbie View Post
    Which would make it...a slur. Who cares if it's only some people within an ethnic group who get called that particular word? If it's being used to denigrate somebody because of their ethnicity, it's a racial slur.
    Very dark skin isn't specific to any one ethnic group. There are a lot of things I wouldn't want to be called, that doesn't make the terms an ethnic slur.

    I just think it's like calling "dog shit" a racial slur because it's not a "nice thing" and could be used to describe someone's skin color in an insulting way.

    Has anyone actually heard another person use the term "coal" as a racial slur? (I'm actually curious.) and if so, in what country? Maybe this is a cultural thing I'm not aware of.

  9. #159
    On a wing and a prayer aruna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A Small Town in Germany
    Posts
    12,704
    When I was growing up in Guyana, it used to be a racial slur to call black people "green".
    OUT NOW!
    The Lost Daughter of India
    Amazon UK:

    Amazon US:

    Sons of Gods -- the Mahabharata

    Website
    Facebook


    Do you know what you are? You are a manuscript of a divine letter. You are a mirror reflecting a noble face. This universe is not outside of you. Look inside yourself; everything that you want, you are already that ...
    ~ Rumi

  10. #160
    sleeping the sleep of the sleepless Mayfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    my own private Idaho
    Posts
    294
    misses, if you look up the term "coal black" in the urban dictionary, there are lots of examples of how "coal" is used as a derogatory racial term. It may be regional, though. I'm not sure.
    CHARM & STRANGE (St. Martin's Griffin, 2013)
    COMPLICIT (St. Martin's Griffin, 2014)
    DELICATE MONSTERS (St. Martin's Griffin, 2015)



    Blog | Twitter | YA Highway

  11. #161
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    USA... sometimes.
    Posts
    1,514
    Sand Dollar Press's address leads to a Beauty Salon. That's rich. (There are no suites...)

    http://www.yelp.com/biz/aveda-santa-monica

    Anyone notice this? (And a poorly rated Beauty Salon, too)

    Quote Originally Posted by aruna View Post
    I wonder how many POC VF asked to beta-read her book?
    Combing through acknowledgments. Not mentioning names in order to protect from fan rage, because I don't think it was 100% their responsibility or even their responsibility at all. Benefit of the doubt here. Just answering the question.

    First writer mentioned: White. Writes Bible Belt stuff with white actors (You can see videos online) Probably the correct person.

    The second writer that urged her forward... white... and it explains how Foyt got the address on the Beauty Salon. (Though it irks me that she's from a diverse part of CA... Oh well, city living doesn't always educate opinions.) I also can guess she's the one that referred her friend to the place that put the book together. (Has self-published book. Honest about it.)

    Third name I have to wonder if it's a lie or not since she's mentioned to be a big shot agent by basic Google search. I'm hoping it's a lie. Also white. (Maybe she sent the manuscript and it ended up on the reject pile with comments? Never know. I rather give benefit of the doubt.)

    I don't believe the fourth name on the list either, but what do I know. BTW, also white. Came up on Google. Director. Would fit with her claim she's an actress.

    Fifth name... actress... white. Don't know if I should believe that or not either.

    Family, white and white.

    And then the artist.... not sure. I doubt it's the first hit on Google. The person mentioned there is too PoC sensitive... I can't find the name in conjunction with anything other than that specific book and that press that actually put the book together. Which is just odd as anything. Shouldn't he be doing other things with that company? Same with the other artist name.

    So, by the names mentioned. No PoCs. Don't know beyond that. Arthur Golden, though, he consulted an expert on the subject matter and gave credit (though, granted, got sued for it.) So I can't see how mentioning all those people, real acknowledgments or not that she wouldn't think to include a PoC.

    The whole false address thing, though makes me question her acknowledgments... and the whole trying to front another company as doing the work of another company on the copyright page... it makes me raise an eyebrow at least. Oh and she lied about the awards/reviews.... or that's what another person who filtered through the "reviews" said. I don't begrudge self-published. Not for me, particularly. However, I do begrudge lying.
    Last edited by Rachel Udin; 07-30-2012 at 11:35 PM.

  12. #162
    Worst song played on ugliest guitar Libbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    umber and black Humberland
    Posts
    5,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayfield View Post
    misses, if you look up the term "coal black" in the urban dictionary, there are lots of examples of how "coal" is used as a derogatory racial term. It may be regional, though. I'm not sure.
    I'm not doubting that it's used as a derogatory term when applied to people. Surely it is in that context. I was asking why it's still considered offensive when applied to inanimate objects (or if it is.)

  13. #163
    On a wing and a prayer aruna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A Small Town in Germany
    Posts
    12,704
    @Rachel: wow, thanks for the research!

    I think when writng such obviously sensitive stuff, the first thing one should do as a writer would be to ensure that it is OK's be people who might be affected!

    When I write about India --a country I love, but which is not my own -- I am particular about getting Indians to read through it to keep out the gaffes I'm sure to make.
    OUT NOW!
    The Lost Daughter of India
    Amazon UK:

    Amazon US:

    Sons of Gods -- the Mahabharata

    Website
    Facebook


    Do you know what you are? You are a manuscript of a divine letter. You are a mirror reflecting a noble face. This universe is not outside of you. Look inside yourself; everything that you want, you are already that ...
    ~ Rumi

  14. #164
    All hopped up on goofballs. DarthPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by Libbie View Post
    All that aside, though, I don't understand why no one can ever use the term "coal-black" to describe something that's a matte black because the word "coal" is also used as a racial slur
    ...I guess I don't see how that's as offensive as referring to a PERSON (as in this book) as a Coal. I realize this is probably my white privilege talking. I'm trying to understand the difference better so I don't accidentally write something that will offend.
    ...
    Can anybody help me understand this better? I really want to understand this. I'd be mortified if I accidentally wrote something that could be taken as an offense to people.
    Describing inanimate objects or animals as coal (or raisin or chocolate) colored isn't offensive. I know "charcoal" is one of the check-box color options on many veterinary forms I've filled out. I mean, you can't degrade or obecjtify a pair of boots or a cat by comparing it to a lump of coal or a dessert food.

    Otherwise, SO much depends on context. Most analogies for skin color aren't always offensive in and of themselves. They need a history of disparaging use or an otherwise offensive context. For example, food decriptions are much-maligned because 1. they're way overdone, and 2. they're most often used by white authors in an exoticizing way. Like, if an author doesn't bother describing the tone of the white characters' skins, but the first PoC mentioned will be her skin was the exact shade of a Starbucks double mocha latte with cinnamon freckles and a dollop of non-dairy whipped topping... or whatever. Like white is default/plain, and everything else is flavored. In cases like that, the associations are positive, but still racist because of the color=flavor implication. Really though, unless it's a flowery romance novel where even the dimples of the hero/ine's buttcheeks are likened to the thumbprints of angels upon velvety mounds of cookie dough, there's probably no reason to describe in detail the exact paint-sample hue of any character's skin. Especially for minor characters.

    tl;dr: Describing boots and birds as coal-black is cool; not so for people.

  15. #165
    ~~~~*~~~~ backslashbaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    12,636
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    Very dark skin isn't specific to any one ethnic group. There are a lot of things I wouldn't want to be called, that doesn't make the terms an ethnic slur.

    I just think it's like calling "dog shit" a racial slur because it's not a "nice thing" and could be used to describe someone's skin color in an insulting way.

    Has anyone actually heard another person use the term "coal" as a racial slur? (I'm actually curious.) and if so, in what country? Maybe this is a cultural thing I'm not aware of.
    Zwarte Piet was my first thought when I heard coal.
    It's Woman, by Kraft. All your favourite classic flavours like virgin, whore, damsel, black widow and now all-new feminazi! Extra spicy!
    --
    BunnyMaz

    Did you just Godwin a 4 year old?
    -- Celia Cyanide


    I've walked these streets in the madhouse, asylum they can be
    Where a wild-eyed misfit prophet on a traffic island stopped
    And he raved of saving me

    Please donate or volunteer: http://www.karmakrew.org/Home_Page.html

  16. #166
    Rewriting My Destiny Cyia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Brillig in the slithy toves...
    Posts
    18,028
    Out of curiosity, would "kohl" have the same negative connotation? Obviously, there's no way to differentiate the words when spoken, but in print, kohl is nothing like coal in use or value. Kohl is used for beauty rather than to insinuate something's dirty.

    I can't imagine describing someone as having kohl skin (I usually used sepia or umber colors), but I'm curious.

  17. #167
    Delerium ex Ennui Xelebes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    13,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyia View Post
    Out of curiosity, would "kohl" have the same negative connotation? Obviously, there's no way to differentiate the words when spoken, but in print, kohl is nothing like coal in use or value. Kohl is used for beauty rather than to insinuate something's dirty.

    I can't imagine describing someone as having kohl skin (I usually used sepia or umber colors), but I'm curious.
    Without turning to the dictionary, I have no idea what kohl is. Probably the same as using the term "jet black."

  18. #168
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    USA... sometimes.
    Posts
    1,514
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyia View Post
    Out of curiosity, would "kohl" have the same negative connotation? Obviously, there's no way to differentiate the words when spoken, but in print, kohl is nothing like coal in use or value. Kohl is used for beauty rather than to insinuate something's dirty.

    I can't imagine describing someone as having kohl skin (I usually used sepia or umber colors), but I'm curious.
    I'd have more trouble with it from a usage standpoint. Kohl is eye liner for under the eye. The context in terms of using it as a color descriptor is odd 'cause such things come in other colors and it's an object more than a color.

    Why can't we go simply with "black" and leave it? I usually only specify the shade when it'll add something to the world building around the character.

    For example, I used mahogany for eyes, not only because I like the term, but because it 1. refers to eyes--there won't be political upheaval over eyes. 2. it builds on the fact that Indians have a variety of eye colors (and so do modern-day Koreans, BTW--which is another reason. Range in different color browns to black) 3. India has that wood in the country, so it's a subtle way to build a picture. I looked it up.

    On a more personal level, I also associate the word with warmth. The smooth m to an open a to a soft h with an open o... harder g to an open a... (But that's my weird sense of linguistics at play.)

    KISS is sometimes just the best way to go, in writing and in politics. White, black, tan, brown, dark brown. If you deviate, have a good reason to.

  19. #169
    and she was never seen again zahra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    London and Florida
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthPanda View Post
    Describing inanimate objects or animals as coal (or raisin or chocolate) colored isn't offensive. I know "charcoal" is one of the check-box color options on many veterinary forms I've filled out. I mean, you can't degrade or obecjtify a pair of boots or a cat by comparing it to a lump of coal or a dessert food.

    Otherwise, SO much depends on context. Most analogies for skin color aren't always offensive in and of themselves. They need a history of disparaging use or an otherwise offensive context. For example, food decriptions are much-maligned because 1. they're way overdone, and 2. they're most often used by white authors in an exoticizing way. Like, if an author doesn't bother describing the tone of the white characters' skins, but the first PoC mentioned will be her skin was the exact shade of a Starbucks double mocha latte with cinnamon freckles and a dollop of non-dairy whipped topping... or whatever. Like white is default/plain, and everything else is flavored. In cases like that, the associations are positive, but still racist because of the color=flavor implication. Really though, unless it's a flowery romance novel where even the dimples of the hero/ine's buttcheeks are likened to the thumbprints of angels upon velvety mounds of cookie dough, there's probably no reason to describe in detail the exact paint-sample hue of any character's skin. Especially for minor characters.

    tl;dr: Describing boots and birds as coal-black is cool; not so for people.
    Re the skin-colour descriptions: I also find that white authors especially indulge in this as a way of making sure readers know the sexy female is not TOO black. It's always 'caramel' rather than 'liquorice'! And there's the possible agenda of coaxing white readers who might not think of black people as attractive by linking their skin to something tasty and inoffensive.
    WIP horror
    FREETS Editing
    WATCH ALL NIGHT Editing
    OPEN HOUSE About to start
    UNEARTHED You're next, love.

  20. #170
    You can't sit with us! missesdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    6,866
    Type any color into google image search and you'll see why it's more effective to make a comparison than to simply say brown. Specificity.

  21. #171
    permaflounced
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    .
    Posts
    3,935
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    Has anyone actually heard another person use the term "coal" as a racial slur? (I'm actually curious.) and if so, in what country? Maybe this is a cultural thing I'm not aware of.
    I haven't but I have heard a friend of mine who's a fellow white Aussie psych' nurse describe an African nurse he was working with as being easy going and friendly, with skin as black as coal, a nice smile and a mellow accent who's a really cool guy to work with.

    I absolutely guarantee that he didn't think this nurse's skin was ugly or wrong in any way.

  22. #172
    Rewriting My Destiny Cyia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Brillig in the slithy toves...
    Posts
    18,028
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    Type any color into google image search and you'll see why it's more effective to make a comparison than to simply say brown. Specificity.

    The lack of specificity is how those who objected to a black Rue in the Hunger Games explained their confusion.

  23. #173
    but appreciated anyway... Unimportant's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Aotearoa
    Posts
    5,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyia View Post
    The lack of specificity is how those who objected to a black Rue in the Hunger Games explained their confusion.
    True. There is a subset of readers for whom white is the default assumption to such an extreme that describing a character as having brown skin, dark eyes, and black hair isn't enough. They'll still imagine a brunette Caucasian with a tan.

    However, it's possible that such readers, if confronted with a more specific description (black skin! Really really black! As black as a black thing on a black day, only blacker! Also, naturally textured hair! Dreadlocks, even! Got it yet?) would have a knee-jerk reaction and put the book down because they don't want to read about a 'good' character who isn't white.

  24. #174
    ...
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    Very dark skin isn't specific to any one ethnic group. There are a lot of things I wouldn't want to be called, that doesn't make the terms an ethnic slur.

    I just think it's like calling "dog shit" a racial slur because it's not a "nice thing" and could be used to describe someone's skin color in an insulting way.

    Has anyone actually heard another person use the term "coal" as a racial slur? (I'm actually curious.) and if so, in what country? Maybe this is a cultural thing I'm not aware of.
    Seriously? You don't think that using the word "coal" to describe one set of people and using "pearl" to describe another set of people is a problem? It's an implied insult.

    When speaking in terms of monetary value which would a person view as being "of more worth and value"? Exactly.

    It doesn't matter if it wasn't previously used as a racial or ethnic slur. And the argument that one person wasn't offended by it when a cousin's sister's aunt's next door neighbor wasn't offended by it is invalid as well as insensitive.

  25. #175
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    USA... sometimes.
    Posts
    1,514
    Quote Originally Posted by missesdash View Post
    Type any color into google image search and you'll see why it's more effective to make a comparison than to simply say brown. Specificity.
    Gotta ask you the reverse question to play devil's advocate here.

    Do you feel the same need to be specific when it comes to describing a white character's skin tone?

    Ivory, cream, beige, corn silk, old lace, linen, Antique white, champagne, eggshell, bone, vanilla, Navajo white, ecru?

    You need to do that in reverse?

    In Hundred Thousand Kingdom, NK Jemisin mentions that her character's skin tone is brown and *leaves* it. She then uses other cues to help that picture along. (Like using a map of a Mayan, I believe, city.) This is not set on Earth either, but it's kind of obvious because she compares skin tones, cultural backgrounds, etc. In another words, she doesn't rely 100% on character physical description.

    I think there is a certain point that people will refuse, no matter how many times you try to make it obvious that the character is not white. And you can't help them.

    While it does help to have a cover like this: http://msagarawest.files.wordpress.c...e-1-broken.jpg or this
    http://michellesagara.com/wp-content...-3-shining.jpg

    Or even this: http://www.glassonion.com/catalog/im...arge_sarra.jpg

    I kinda got by the fact that they kept it simple that the skin color was not white. Melanie Rawn did it several times by contrasting the stark white hair hair with the skin, by making a point that the most important thing in the book by then was not skin color, but by ranking of the bloodlines.

    But I'm sure despite those constant reminders people will simply refuse. And if you make a big exception to skin color in PoCs, then will you make a big exception to white skin colors too? You gotta play an even card.

    and tan=/=brown. O.o; If you are white and turned brown, not bronze or tan, there are some issues. At that point, I'd give up on the reader. They are stuck.

    So yeah, KISS it, and use other cues besides physical description.

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Custom Search