Cultural Appropriation and Celebration of Failure to Read the Screen

Status
Not open for further replies.

Putputt

permanently suctioned to Buz's leg
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
5,448
Reaction score
2,980
Quite possibly, I don't know the man but he's a famous bestseller of spy fiction (Alex Rider and now the new James Bond novels), not just some random guy.

I haven't read his books, especially the one in question, but regardless of who he is, if the editor said it because s/he felt that the specific book was problematic in the way it showcased the Black character, then I think that's valid advice.

If the editor said it as a general "white people shouldn't write Black characters, ever", then I think that's pretty bad advice. We're sort of groping in the dark here, since we haven't read the MS, and so we don't know why the editor advised him against writing a Black character...
 

Putputt

permanently suctioned to Buz's leg
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
5,448
Reaction score
2,980
I'm not sure what to make of this, as it seems to be implying Britain is isolated from the topics of this conversation. Forgive me if I'm misreading, but I've seen a particular attitude from Brits before -- a sort of, "wth America?" with respect to our various racial and cultural tensions, that comes with a whiff of Brits being befuddled at how other countries can have such Issues.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MR. PUTT.

Our nightly conversation:

Me: [Insert some atrocity happening in the US]
Mr. Putt: *shakes head* The US is a funny place. That sort of thing would NOT fly in England.
Me: *Googles* *comes up with half a dozen similar atrocities that happened in England*
 

PeteMC

@PeteMC666
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
3,003
Reaction score
367
Location
UK
Website
talonwraith.wordpress.com
Yeah, I have to admit England is a funny place in general. We seem to have "localised blindspot" as a national trait over here. Is this stuff just not talked about over here? Not really, outside of literary circles, in all honesty no it's not. And we wonder why the Scots hate us, and the Welsh, and the Irish...
 

morngnstar

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
2,271
Reaction score
297
Which is why no definition of appropriation is sufficient without this acknowledgement: the people who decide what is to be protected is the people who stand to be harmed.

But which of them? They don't always have a monolithic opinion. Apparently, approval from just one member of a culture is not sufficient, because:

It's not as simple as "I went to the Bahamas and a Bahamian braided my hair on the beach, so obvs, it's okay."

Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority? That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture? And even if it were practical, it seems unfair. A book doesn't have to appeal to everybody. One argument against censorship is, "If you don't like it, don't read it." If there had been a vote on whether The Da Vinci Code should be published, there's a good chance it wouldn't have been, although I think most people think it's just badly written, not harmful. At worst it blends fact with fiction leading to a confusion of the two.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,057
Location
Not where you last saw me.
But which of them? They don't always have a monolithic opinion. Apparently, approval from just one member of a culture is not sufficient, because:



Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority? That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture? And even if it were practical, it seems unfair. A book doesn't have to appeal to everybody. One argument against censorship is, "If you don't like it, don't read it." If there had been a vote on whether The Da Vinci Code should be published, there's a good chance it wouldn't have been, although I think most people think it's just badly written, not harmful. At worst it blends fact with fiction leading to a confusion of the two.

I never quite know the basis of your posts, morngnstar. Are you enamored of the role of devil's advocate? Are you trolling? Are you . . .? You know what? I'm going with item "C". So here's the deal: If a writer does not know enough about a culture to assess the potential for causing harm, they shouldn't be writing about it.

What does The Da Vinci Code have to do with a repressed culture? Admittedly, I couldn't slog my way through it, so I don't know. What was the repressed culture harmed or potentially harmed in that novel?
 

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
8,563
Reaction score
8,448
Location
The Seattle suburbs
Website
www.reneedominick.com
Yeah, I have to admit England is a funny place in general. We seem to have "localised blindspot" as a national trait over here. Is this stuff just not talked about over here? Not really, outside of literary circles, in all honesty no it's not. And we wonder why the Scots hate us, and the Welsh, and the Irish...
Not to say that this conversation is common dinnertime chit-chat here, or that there aren't plenty of Americans willing to put the blinders on (hello, Dakota Access pipeline), but the awareness is slightly larger than literary circles, and in some places it's far larger than in others.

One key difference, I think, is we (US-ians) live in a colonized place, both as the colonized AND the colonizers. The open fact of appropriation is much closer to hand for a lot of us. Just as a small example, I can't drive 30 miles north, south, east, or west without crossing into treaty-recognized tribal lands. By proximity alone, I'm more acutely aware of issues wrt Native American appropriation, both of the culture and of the land itself. Unlike a British or French or Italian writer, if I write a Native American character carelessly, there's a very significant chance I'm going to face someone in my everyday life whose living culture I've mishandled. Not that I haven't erred in this way in my writing, or that American writers haven't rampantly mishandled all sorts of cultural issues, but it seems to me to be a half-step harder to maintain a blindspot when you're living on lands that a mere 300 years ago didn't belong to you.
 
Last edited:

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
18,619
Reaction score
4,034
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MR. PUTT.

Our nightly conversation:

Me: [Insert some atrocity happening in the US]
Mr. Putt: *shakes head* The US is a funny place. That sort of thing would NOT fly in England.
Me: *Googles* *comes up with half a dozen similar atrocities that happened in England*

Maybe it's a matter of terminology.

"Cultural appropriation" exists in every colonizing nation, but it may not be called that.

Yeah, I have to admit England is a funny place in general. We seem to have "localised blindspot" as a national trait over here. Is this stuff just not talked about over here? Not really, outside of literary circles, in all honesty no it's not. And we wonder why the Scots hate us, and the Welsh, and the Irish...

Just going with the megalith of Harry Potter as more modern Brit-lit, and seeing it with an American eye... it's there. How many non-white characters are there in prominent roles? (Hermione *could* have been, given her description in book 1, but she wasn't coded that way.)

You've got Lee, Dean and Cho. And "Cho Chang" has its own issues as a character name, according to native speakers from what I've read on this board and elsewhere. Padma and Pavarti are the closest we get to fleshed-out characters with a different background. The Wizarding World is built to seem international, but it doesn't follow through on that claim.

Look at the hornet's nest that got kicked when lavender Brown became a main character in the movies - and suddenly went from a black girl to a white girl.

When the stories moved to the US for the new material on Pottermore, the same "surface scan" logic applied, completely botching the idea of Native American cultures that were boiled into a page-and-a-half magic concept that actually insults the history of people with that background.

But which of them? They don't always have a monolithic opinion. Apparently, approval from just one member of a culture is not sufficient, because:

One person never speaks for an entire culture. Experience informs each person's opinions and beliefs. Some aspects of a cultural background will have specific meaning to some people which they won't have for others. The point is to be respectful.



Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority?
No one is ever going to get universal approval for anything, no matter what the source material or objections. This is a disingenuous argument.

That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture? And even if it were practical, it seems unfair.
One could argue that the misuse or stereotypical use of a culture for the gain of a person outside that culture (or who is unlikely to suffer from their portrayal of it) is unfair.

A book doesn't have to appeal to everybody. One argument against censorship is, "If you don't like it, don't read it."

Appropriation doesn't just hurt those who read a piece. It hurts those portrayed wrongly. If stereotypes are all that make it through the publication process, they're the only/main literary record of cultures which they misrepresent. If all portrayals of people from a certain country are dangerous criminals, then people who read that over and over internalize the idea of that group as dangerous criminals. if all portrayals of people from a certain background are as unintelligent, then readers internalize that, too.

It's not just a matter of not reading "a book" that portrays your culture in a bad light; it's the combined weight of every "classic," every "hit" that perpetuates the same mistaken information. Seeing people gush about things that you know aren't accurate - or might even be insulting.

If there had been a vote on whether The Da Vinci Code should be published, there's a good chance it wouldn't have been, although I think most people think it's just badly written, not harmful. At worst it blends fact with fiction leading to a confusion of the two.

I'm not sure who you think would do the "voting." It's not about voting; it's about vetting. Do your due diligence. Treat all of your characters as important. Think of the children (I write MG/YA) who will see their own lives and cultures reflected in the characters/worlds you build and consider how those children will react to your portrayal.
 

buz

edits all posts at least four times
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
5,147
Reaction score
2,040
But which of them? They don't always have a monolithic opinion. Apparently, approval from just one member of a culture is not sufficient

'Course not. But if a lot of people are saying the same thing, or similar things, it's worth looking into, I think. And a lot of people...you know, are.

Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority? That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture?

Well, you could say general critique rules apply: if one person says something, and it resonates with me, I change it. If several people say it, I'd probably better address it, whether it resonates with me or not.

But with particular respect to this topic--if someone says an aspect of my book is harmful, I should at least try to look at it from their perspective, or if I can't, ask others their opinions. I mean, why wouldn't I? Why outright dismiss it?

Why not at least give listening a fair shake?
 
Last edited:

morngnstar

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
2,271
Reaction score
297
I never quite know the basis of your posts, morngnstar. Are you enamored of the role of devil's advocate? Are you trolling? Are you . . .? You know what? I'm going with item "C". So here's the deal: If a writer does not know enough about a culture to assess the potential for causing harm, they shouldn't be writing about it.

I'm responding to the statement that members of the culture should make the call. According to that, regardless of how much I might know, I'm not qualified to make the call.

What does The Da Vinci Code have to do with a repressed culture?

Not much, really. I was trying to use it as a neutral example of a book that was despised by many, but liked by many others.

Admittedly, I couldn't slog my way through it, so I don't know. What was the repressed culture harmed or potentially harmed in that novel?

Arguably, Catholics.
 

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
18,619
Reaction score
4,034
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
I'm responding to the statement that members of the culture should make the call. According to that, regardless of how much I might know, I'm not qualified to make the call.

This is the crux of it - you're not. I'm not, not if I'm writing about a culture to which I don't belong. You do your best, but if you miss it, then that's for someone with actual, working knowledge of the culture to say - not you. You can say that you did your research and you can (and should) apologize for getting it wrong, but you do not get to argue that they're wrong.

Going back to my "blanket" example. You can do all the research, and watch all the things, to the point that you know that blanket is important. You can flawlessly describe a ritual in which that blanket is passed from this person to that. You can be so perfect that readers can taste the dust in the air. But, if you insist that the blanket is some artifact being passed down, very solemnly, blah, blah, blah, you're still wrong. You're not getting the nuances of the invisible thing that blanket represents, and that's where outsiders screw up. I'm writing outside my zone right now, and I'm doing everything I can to make sure I don't do this myself.

The perfect representation is, I think, a character from Things Fall Apart. There's a translator who doesn't quite get the language right. Every time he means to say "I am" or " I do," he uses a word that means "my bottom." "My bottom is" or "My bottom does." It's a small inflection, but it's a huge difference, and the native speakers of the language he's "an expert" in obviously pick it up immediately. They start mocking him and he doesn't even realize it.
 

buz

edits all posts at least four times
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
5,147
Reaction score
2,040
Relevant thing on the harm aspect:
[FONT=&quot]Despite my attempts, story after story would appear in my Facebook and Twitter feeds, which often included comments from supporters of the senator, serving as a constant reminder of the ignorance and racism in Canadian society directed toward Indigenous people, even among our politicians and lawmakers.
I tried to suppress the pain until I finally broke down days later when my mother shared that she was celebrating 25 years of sobriety. As I sat my desk in the middle of the workday, the news triggered memories of my childhood before my mother began her healing journey. I tried to compose myself in order to finish the work day, but I could not and went home.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Controversy surrounding these issues takes an emotional toll on Indigenous people.
Residential schools. Boil water advisories. Youth suicide. Lack of housing or proper schools. Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women. If we have not lived these experiences, we often know someone who has.

[...]

They either did not, or chose not, to understand that for Indigenous people, appropriation means theft — of concepts, of identities, of space for storytelling and artistic expression. By calling for such a prize [the appropriation prize], this incident is seen as a group of white people in power in media supporting the silence of Indigenous voices — at a time where diversity is so needed.

[/FONT]
 

morngnstar

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
2,271
Reaction score
297
Appropriation doesn't just hurt those who read a piece. It hurts those portrayed wrongly.

I get that. But I'm referring to differences of opinion within the culture. Some readers might like the story, and forgive small inaccuracies. Others might despise the story, and nitpick inaccuracies.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,057
Location
Not where you last saw me.
I get that. But I'm referring to differences of opinion within the culture. Some readers might like the story, and forgive small inaccuracies. Others might despise the story, and nitpick inaccuracies.

Why would a writer want to risk harm for the sake of a "maybe" if the overwhelming evidence, as found through due diligence, is as buzhidao quoted:

They either did not, or chose not, to understand that for Indigenous people, appropriation means theft — of concepts, of identities, of space for storytelling and artistic expression. By calling for such a prize [the appropriation prize], this incident is seen as a group of white people in power in media supporting the silence of Indigenous voices — at a time where diversity is so needed.
 

Anna Iguana

reading all the things
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
925
Reaction score
219
Location
US
Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority? That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture? And even if it were practical, it seems unfair. A book doesn't have to appeal to everybody. One argument against censorship is, "If you don't like it, don't read it."

In this thread, we haven't much distinguished writing from publishing. Perhaps, given low barriers to self-publishing, we shouldn't? Yet I suspect the distinction matters. I think, in private, people should be free to write basically anything. (I'm open to exceptions but can't generate any.) Writing is a form of thinking. Even if writers gets details wrong, they may emerge with greater empathy for people around them. That's a good thing.

Unfettered publishing and book-marketing are another story. Much/all writing about people from marginalized groups, by writers outside those groups, probably has some merit--and some problems. Agents and acquisition editors seem to be making estimates (consciously or not) about whether enough people in non-monolithic groups will find writing helpful, or at least not harmful, so that the writing can sell--and not sink under the weight of controversy. I would appreciating hearing more from people in (other) marginalized groups about how they'd like agents and editors to decide which books to represent and publish, and how agents and editors might better prepare themselves to make those decisions.
 

JJ Litke

People are not wearing enough hats
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
7,997
Reaction score
4,475
Location
Austin
Website
www.jjlitke.com
Is objection by one member of a culture grounds to tank a project? Or is it based on a majority? That seems impractical. Is there to be a vote on every representation of a culture? This is a reductio ad absurdum argument, as if instituting a vote on what can be published were even a remote possibility. And even if it were practical, it seems unfair. A book doesn't have to appeal to everybody. No one has argued otherwise. One argument against censorship is, "If you don't like it, don't read it." If there had been a vote on whether The Da Vinci Code should be published, there's a good chance it wouldn't have been, although I think most people think it's just badly written, What most people is that? It's a best seller. Lots of people loved it. not harmful. At worst it blends fact with fiction leading to a confusion of the two.

You just said above that a book doesn't have to appeal to everyone. If someone writes a book about a minority group of which they are not a member, and members of that group feel they did a crap job of it, they might object. They might do so strenuously. But that's okay, because a book doesn't have to appeal to everyone. Then a few people hear about the book and buy it, and a few others make a point of not buying it. And that's still okay, because a book doesn't have to appeal to everyone. Maybe there's more people on the not-buy side than the buy side, and sales are low. Maybe the author even gets dropped by the publisher--that happens to people who write inoffensive books, too. If you want your book to sell, it has to appeal to enough people that they're willing to spend money on it.

And if people don't want to spend money on a book, whatever their reason, that is not censorship. Not even a little.
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,865
Reaction score
4,640
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
During RT Booklovers earlier this month, I attended two panels on diversity and effective representation in romance. The general consensus in both was any author who can tell a story and tell it well can and should do their due diligence to research any cultures that aren't their own, primarily at the risk of falling back onto stereotypes or "othering" people.

However.

Authors need to look at why they're also writing about other cultures (is one of the MCs Chinese American because they just so happen to be Chinese American [I once made a character Japanese because I came up with this great name and needed/wanted to use it] vs. the MC is Chinese American to fulfill some perceived "quota" or paying lip service?) By doing the research, an author will also avoid one of the stickier issues of somebody coming across as The Noble ___________ (fill in the blank) because their story is so bogged down with sadness and angst over their culture/race. You need to make sure your characters, like in any other situation, are three-dimensional and interesting to readers; if it's not your story to tell, don't tell it.

They also cautioned that no matter how deeply you've researched the background for your story and its characters, no matter how nuanced and three-dimensional these people become in the written word on your pages, no matter how many beta readers (other bit of advice: rely heavily on beta readers) give you a passing grade and tell you that one grandmother reminds them of their own and you gave the greatest detail on the wedding ceremony, you'll piss somebody off. For whatever reason, you'll piss them off and upset them to the point they'll blog about your crimes against literature from here to Kingdom Come because how dare you write about Jewish people when you aren't even the least bit Jewish. They'll complain it's obvious you had to research your story and it only reads like you're regurgitating facts from the Encyclopædia Britannica but you're probably not writing for them, anyway. All of the panelists said to not worry about any of that because it's going to happen. As long as you write the truest, strongest story to the best of your abilities, you'll do okay.
 

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
18,619
Reaction score
4,034
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
When you get into publishing, it's bigger than just representation. Going back to the point about J@mes P@tterson - his books are considered mainstream because he's the king of consumer fiction. It has nothing to do with the content of the books; they'd be promoted the same without regard to the background of Alex Cross. He could have given Cross any cultural markers, and it would still be a P@tterson novel.

If a POC wrote the same novels, they're no longer considered mainstream. That's a hallmark of appropriation. Why should a person from outside a given culture be allowed to profit from that culture when a member of can't?

A more recent example is Before She Ignites. Much has been made of the cover, as it's reportedly the first time a black cover model has gotten the "pretty gown" image; the author is Caucasian. I've seen a fair number of book bloggers trying to parse whether they should celebrate the model's milestone or question why that milestone didn't go to a POC author
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,865
Reaction score
4,640
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
This also came up in one of the panels: a woman writes a romance novel with your standard Lady CEO™ MC who's pursued by the Alpha Male CEO™ who works for the rival company and it's standard romance but if a black woman writes a romance with a black Lady CEO™ being pursued by a black Alpha Male CEO™, it's suddenly "niche" and publishers aren't sure they can sell it (there is some hope, however. Somebody mentioned things are changing but at the speed of publishing).
 

noirdood

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
238
Reaction score
15
Location
California desert
Real scientists will tell you there is only one race, human. Yes the people from Europe came over and did terrible things in the Americas but they were a mishmash of cultures/races from all over the globe. Check out what the Germanic peoples did to the aboriginal peoples of Great Britain in the late 500s (the same as what they did in the Americas, later). Can a Celt write a British novel? Can a Brit write about Celtic people? What was Shakespeare doing writing about Moors? What gall. And about Celts (the Scottish, Irish and Welsh)? Should not be allowed. Time to burn some books?
Check out a book called "Famous All Over Town."
 

Anna Iguana

reading all the things
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
925
Reaction score
219
Location
US
I'm really torn whether leaving the cultural approp. thread open for someone new to post a drive-by every few days, engaging with nothing that has been said, is a positive. I'm white, but I'm also in a marginalized group--a phrase that sterilizes experiences much more raw--and I'm trying to stay polite. Trusting your judgment, Ari and AW, but also publicly waving goodbye to this thread.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,783
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Real scientists will tell you there is only one race, human. Yes the people from Europe came over and did terrible things in the Americas but they were a mishmash of cultures/races from all over the globe. Check out what the Germanic peoples did to the aboriginal peoples of Great Britain in the late 500s (the same as what they did in the Americas, later). Can a Celt write a British novel? Can a Brit write about Celtic people? What was Shakespeare doing writing about Moors? What gall. And about Celts (the Scottish, Irish and Welsh)? Should not be allowed. Time to burn some books?
Check out a book called "Famous All Over Town."

What's your point?

Are you saying that there's no difference between something that happened 1500 years ago and something that happened in the last century (and is still happening) in terms of the effects on people who are alive right now?

Are you saying that it's okay for whichever culture happens to be dominant and colonizing at this point in history to bulldoze, marginalize, and misrepresent/stereotype other cultures simply because it's been done in the past?
 

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
18,619
Reaction score
4,034
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
You're conflating race and culture. There's a great deal of overlap, but the two aren't identical.

Sidney Poitier once said that as a man from the Caribbean he wasn't comfortable being called African American. Charlize Theron and Hugo Weaving are both from Africa, but aren't POC.

You can' just drag out the "We're all the same race genetically!!!"
argument anymore than you can get away with "Not All Men!!!"

Perception and marketing don't come with genetics attached. It's a name on the front cover, not a blood-type. The photo on the back flap isn't an Electrophoresis chart. The experiences of the author and their research aren't Punnett squares.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,783
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Perception and marketing don't come with genetics attached. It's a name on the front cover, not a blood-type. The photo on the back flap isn't an Electrophoresis chart. The experiences of the author and their research aren't Punnett squares.

This is another important point. Biologically, there are no races identified in modern humans, because race-specific alleles haven't been identified in modern humans (though some alleles are more common in some human populations than they are in others).

Race, as the term is generally applied to humans, is a social construct, but that doesn't mean it doesn't reflect something real and significant with regards to culture and the way we latch on to some very superficial and continuously varying anatomical features as a marker for "otherness." The latter may have arisen as a consequence of colonialism, but it has a very real impact on lives and on the way people think of themselves and each other (and how different people and cultures are treated) in the world we live in right now.

Who knows what people will think about today's cultures and identities 1500 years from now. We're alive right now, though, and some people are trying to make the world we currently occupy a better, more just place than it's been in the past.
 
Last edited:

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,057
Location
Not where you last saw me.
When I reopened this thread I mentioned that it was reopened in its entirety "for reasons". The primary reason I left all posts intact was to provide an object lesson in what constitutes an inappropriate post and the types of posts that got the thread locked and transported to the hinterlands in the first place.

I do expect participation to be predicated on the whole deal below and most specifically the parenthetical part of the second item on the list. This is an important discussion; do not drop in and dump a cockamamie unsupported "thought" and leave. AW is a diverse community of intelligent, thoughtful persons and you will respect your fellow members through considered participation or you won't participate.


Mod Note: We're reopening this topic here in Roundtable, even though I'm sure our AW Admin thinks there's something wrong in my upper works for agreeing to take it. It's an important topic—I don't think I'm overstating the case to say in today's world, it's a vital topic.

I'm also keeping the Arkham title and all the posts for reasons. So here's the deal:

  • We debate ideas and viewpoints, not people. If you stick to that, I can promise to not make you unhappy with my response.
  • Make sure you thoroughly read a post before responding to it. (In fact, read all the posts to make sure you're participating in the whole conversation.)
  • Apply Socratic principles: i.e., ask probing questions and make sure you understand. (No snark.)
  • When you put forth your own ideas and views, aim for clarity. (Think before you post.)

The thread is now open.
 

LJD

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
4,226
Reaction score
525
I saw this review today, and I thought I would post it as an example of how badly authors write PoC characters sometimes. This book is an example of harmful representation...and it's a finalist for a top romance award.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.