Do writers have to "out" themselves to agents, using #OwnVoices?

Harlequin

Eat books, not brains!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,584
Reaction score
1,412
Location
The land from whence the shadows fall
Website
www.sunyidean.com
I would say you can call it #ownvoices if you share a marginalized identity with one of the main characters in your book, but the book doesn't have to be about being gay, etc.

Of course, you don't have to if you don't feel comfortable with it.

By default, that's going to be harder for secondary world. Or at least, the link will look more tenuous/less obvious.

I get what you're saying Liz, but intentionally or not it does *feel* like the ownvoices thing is going to be slightly self-selecting in favour of super-diverse diversity (which is definitely an official term). Like when the black-Jewish guy joins the team in Archer and everyone is super excited because he ticks as many boxes as possible, which of course was totally absurd and defeating the intention of such laws/measures. Which then leads to the "not asian enough" thing with that writer as mentioned above.
 

novicewriter

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
293
Reaction score
48
...(And if people think authors of marginalized identities don't have to put up with shit anymore, they are very, very wrong. In the thread I mentioned above, I wrote: "This [study] comes only three days after I was told not to use a Chinese surname for my new pen name, and also 'If the characters just happen to be Chinese, but they’re still identifiable/relatable, that’s okay' (approx wording) which seems to imply that most of us Asians are unrelatable freaks . And this was by a well-respected editor.")

Yes. That's the whole thing that was confusing me. Because literary agents and editors seemed to be claiming, "We want diverse authors!" and gave the impression that it'd be okay, safe, and economically good business sense for #OwnVoices authors to "come out," I originally thought it might be a good idea, but when I looked at #OwnVoices author's Twitter feeds and read reviews others had given of their books, and read their comments about how they just had to deal with or block anti-LGBT+ or anti-POC readers who'd decided to criticize them for being a marginalized identity and/or writing marginalized characters (e.g., "You're a LGBT+/POC, and you had a LGBT+/POC in your book; you dislike white people/are a liberal," and things and problems that I didn't read or see other heterosexual authors mention having to deal with, nor did I see ant-LGBT+/POC reviews on their books' Amazon pages), I realized it might not be a good idea.

I didn't expect to see #OwnVoices authors have these types of negative reviews and interactions with some of the public on social media just because of their LGBT+/POC identities; I thought adults would be less judgemental, more accepting, and open-minded.

The other problem would be that, since some researchers say that sexuality can be fluid for some people, some LGBT+ authors' sexuality might change. So, if literary agents and editors want or expect LGTB+ authors to identify themselves as a certain sexual orientation (e.g., gay), but years later, the author realizes they're bisexual or pansexual, it might cause other to criticize and judge them for it, claiming "You must've been lying about being gay/your sexual orientation and being #OwnVoices."

A Korean-American author's comment about what an editor said to him about his Korean and Korean-American characters not being "Asian enough" went viral on Twitter. It's pretty insulting and disrespectful when literary agents or editors who aren't #OwnVoices authors and who are heterosexual, claim that want to represent #OwnVoices authors, but then don't listen to #OwnVoices authors and try to tell them how they should write characters with a marginalized identity that they haven't experienced or don't know about, based on harmful and outdated racial/sexual stereotypes.

It shows that #OwnVoices authors still aren't as respected as others would believe.
 
Last edited:

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
14,537
Reaction score
24,107
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
Yes. That's the whole thing that was confusing me. Because literary agents and editors seemed to be claiming, "We want diverse authors!" and gave the impression that it'd be okay, safe, and economically good business sense for #OwnVoices authors to "come out," I originally thought it might be a good idea, but when I looked at #OwnVoices author's Twitter feeds and read reviews others had given of their books, and read their comments about how they just had to deal with or block anti-LGBT+ or anti-POC readers who'd decided to criticize them for being a marginalized identity and/or writing marginalized characters (e.g., "You're a LGBT+/POC, and you had a LGBT+/POC in your book; you dislike white people/are a liberal," and things and problems that I didn't read or see other heterosexual authors mention having to deal with, nor did I see ant-LGBT+/POC reviews on their books' Amazon pages), I realized it might not be a good idea.

Publishing is no more (or less) safe a place to come out than any other industry. And when you publish, you immediately become a public figure. #OwnVoices authors who are harassed are not harassed because they're authors; they're harassed because they're non-cis/white/hetero people who are visible and dare to have opinions. (To be clear, there is no excuse for anyone to be harassed on the internet or anywhere else.)

Agents do want diverse authors, but that want doesn't eliminate the longstanding social issues, all of which are as entrenched in publishing (and bookselling, and book buying) as anywhere else. The push for diversity is a beginning - and no, you don't have to put yourself on the front line if you're not comfortable there. There are a lot of good reasons not to do so, and nobody's going to think you're doing anything wrong if you choose not to out yourself.

(And there are lots of things that can hammer you in publishing. Me having an obviously female first name hasn't exactly worked in my favor, although having never done it any other way I don't have a useful counterpoint.)
 

Harlequin

Eat books, not brains!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,584
Reaction score
1,412
Location
The land from whence the shadows fall
Website
www.sunyidean.com
I guess my concern is that it sometimes feels like diversity as a concept is (arguably) in danger of being defined by people who aren't diverse, or don't consider themselves to be; and that by extension, marginalised authors feel pushed to fit themselves into those slightly artificial categories, or else needing to qualify their "diversity" if they don't. If that makes sense. It's a sticky subject. If I'm derailing I'll edit out!
 

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
14,537
Reaction score
24,107
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
I guess my concern is that it sometimes feels like diversity as a concept is (arguably) in danger of being defined by people who aren't diverse, or don't consider themselves to be; and that by extension, marginalised authors feel pushed to fit themselves into those slightly artificial categories, or else needing to qualify their "diversity" if they don't. If that makes sense. It's a sticky subject. If I'm derailing I'll edit out!

I think this is absolutely a legit concern. IMHO #OwnVoices is a fairly crude, broad tool, and can potentially be applied in ways that don't really help at all.

Also a possible derail: IMHO the biggest issue is the lack of diversity among employees in the publishing industry. I don't for one second question the sincerity of the people involved in the #OwnVoices movement, but as you point out, non-diverse (or self-identified non-diverse) people aren't necessarily the best ones to define what #OwnVoices even means. They're going to have cultural blind spots - and even when they're aware of that, they're not necessarily going to be any good at getting past them.

That's part of why I think #OwnVoices is a beginning: the impulse is good, but it can't stop there. If we want diverse books out in the world, we need publishers staffed by diverse people.

(Disclaimer: I'm an old suburban white lady, diverse only in ways that don't show, so I'm as blinkered as anyone else.)
 

The Otter

Friendly Neighborhood Mustelid
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
441
Location
In the room next to the noisy ice machine, for all
I guess my concern is that it sometimes feels like diversity as a concept is (arguably) in danger of being defined by people who aren't diverse, or don't consider themselves to be; and that by extension, marginalised authors feel pushed to fit themselves into those slightly artificial categories, or else needing to qualify their "diversity" if they don't. If that makes sense. It's a sticky subject. If I'm derailing I'll edit out!

Yeah, that's the thing. Most aspects of human identity are fairly ambiguous as far as how they're defined, and there are many people who exist in the gray areas and on the boundaries of those identities. There's a sense of, "Do I really qualify? Am I going to be looked at as a poser if I out myself as X or Y?" It can feel like a no-win situation. If I announce "I AM X," I might be inappropriately appropriating an identity that only sort of belongs to me. If I say nothing and let people assume what they will, I'm contributing to my own erasure.
 

LJD

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
4,226
Reaction score
525
Also a possible derail: IMHO the biggest issue is the lack of diversity among employees in the publishing industry. I don't for one second question the sincerity of the people involved in the #OwnVoices movement, but as you point out, non-diverse (or self-identified non-diverse) people aren't necessarily the best ones to define what #OwnVoices even means. They're going to have cultural blind spots - and even when they're aware of that, they're not necessarily going to be any good at getting past them.

Yes. We definitely need more editors and people in positions of power in publishing who are PoC.


For anyone who is curious about the Korean-American author's rejections, the link is here. The two editors in question have since passed away, and I'm not sure when the rejections were received--could have been before the #ownvoices movement. But they are truly atrocious. One of them, rejecting the book because the characters didn't seem Asian enough, includes this gem of a line: "For example, in the scene when she looks into the mirror, you don’t show how she sees her slanted eyes, or how she thinks of her Asianness."
 
Last edited:

LJD

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
4,226
Reaction score
525
There's a sense of, "Do I really qualify? Am I going to be looked at as a poser if I out myself as X or Y?" It can feel like a no-win situation. If I announce "I AM X," I might be inappropriately appropriating an identity that only sort of belongs to me. If I say nothing and let people assume what they will, I'm contributing to my own erasure.

I started a thread last year in PoC here.
 

WormHeart

Dual class author / nightguard
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
254
Reaction score
23
Location
Frozen wasteland of Denmark
Website
www.fromthefrozennorth.com
I guess my concern is that it sometimes feels like diversity as a concept is (arguably) in danger of being defined by people who aren't diverse, or don't consider themselves to be; and that by extension, marginalised authors feel pushed to fit themselves into those slightly artificial categories, or else needing to qualify their "diversity" if they don't. If that makes sense. It's a sticky subject. If I'm derailing I'll edit out!

I totally get this.

I often send in short stories to magazines that want more diversity and especially want writers from "diverse sexual, gender, religious, ethnic backgrounds" - and I probably forget a few catagories.

I always point out that I am a modern pagan (Asatruar), since they do include "diverse religious" in the description, but it feels a bit cheap and I don't think they mean it in that context.
As a white, heterosexual, CIS male I really don't think I can count as "diverse" no matter how much I wave the pagan banner.

Still - they *do* ask about diverse religious backgrounds.

WormHeart
 

hayaku

Registered
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
45
Reaction score
7
Location
Australia
This thread :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

At the risk of resurrecting a now (slightly) old discussion, I think this question raises very serious problems/dilemmas.

If you look at other artists, there is often a subtext of diversity within their work that neither comes through obviously, nor is completely obscured. Think Freddy Mercury's bisexuality, or Brian Wilson's Schizophrenia/Schizotypy.

I agree with the OP, that it's troubling that one would have to "out" (and subsequently market) themselves to gain any of the benefits of what is, as best as I can tell, a genuine desire for authentic diversity in literature.
This cuts especially close to the bone for me, caus my MS is loaded with Neurodiversity concepts, some of which are #ownvoices qualifiers, and some of which are external descriptions. Hey, a lot of them are even hybridised/fused together, because, why not? :)

I'd hate to have to go into more detail than I was comfortable, breaking apart my own creative synthesis (or forfeit my own medical privacy) for the sake of some buzz-word or fad that the marketing boyz read on twitter that morning.

Something to think about maybe :tongue
 

hayaku

Registered
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
45
Reaction score
7
Location
Australia
My feeling on this (having been stewing on it for awhile longer now) - you don't owe anyone an explanation if you don't wish to give one.

Of course. But getting published/agented is like hitting gold these days :tongue

Can anyone resist the temptation of hinting their #ownvoices during a query, and are they then able to back out, or tone it down, once the marketing machine rolls around? Once the contracts are signed? Is it even dishonest to do this, or is it the exploitative machine that is dishonest, and is an adversarial and cynical posture the most apt one to take?

This would be what keeps me up at night, were I shopping around for a trade publisher.
 

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,213
Reaction score
15,827
Location
Australia.
Of course. But getting published/agented is like hitting gold these days :tongue

Can anyone resist the temptation of hinting their #ownvoices during a query, and are they then able to back out, or tone it down, once the marketing machine rolls around? Once the contracts are signed? Is it even dishonest to do this, or is it the exploitative machine that is dishonest, and is an adversarial and cynical posture the most apt one to take?

This would be what keeps me up at night, were I shopping around for a trade publisher.

Sorry - what?
 

Putputt

permanently suctioned to Buz's leg
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
5,448
Reaction score
2,980
Of course. But getting published/agented is like hitting gold these days :tongue

Can anyone resist the temptation of hinting their #ownvoices during a query, Erm, yes? I know of people who choose not to "out" themselves while querying. and are they then able to back out, Yes...? Once you get an agent, you then have a conversation with the agent about how much you're comfortable with revealing in your pitch. I know of PoC authors who asked their agents not to pitch their books as OV, and said agents respected their decisions, cuz it's, you know, the author's decision to make. or tone it down, How do you "tone down" your identity, I don't understand. once the marketing machine rolls around? This would be something that's done prior to the publisher putting together a marketing plan. Once the contracts are signed? The author's stance is probably clarified before the contracts are signed. Is it even dishonest to do this, Dishonest to do what? To not want to expose part of YOUR identity? That's stupid. or is it the exploitative machine that is dishonest, Wha? and is an adversarial and cynical posture the most apt one to take? I'm lost. You got me.

This would be what keeps me up at night, were I shopping around for a trade publisher.

I started out okay, I think, and then I got lost. Help.
 

hayaku

Registered
Joined
Oct 12, 2017
Messages
45
Reaction score
7
Location
Australia
Well, never mind. It's a situation I've found myself in, and it's never pleasant when it happens.

If you want to get a grip on it, take a look at Dave Chapelle's meltdown in 2005. Going from feeling empowered to "feeling like a prostitute" virtually overnight, and not seeing where the turning point even was. Similar thing happened to Brian Wilson between Pet sounds and SMiLE, as he attempted to explore his own psychosis through his music. Spike Lee explored it in "bamboozled", but its hard to tell whether this was a personal or collective metaphor he was employing. Hell, even Art Spiegelman was so traumatised by Maus, he had to write a sequel, where all he did was delve into the double edged sword of success vs exposition.

Take home lesson (because I agree my last post was incoherent) is that promoting yourself through your identity involves a necessary exposition of vulnerability. Where this mixes with pragmatism, market forces and economic power structures, can produce messy results. And this has taken down far bigger names than anyone posting here.
 
Last edited:

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,213
Reaction score
15,827
Location
Australia.
Take home lesson (because I agree my last post was incoherent) is that promoting yourself through your identity involves a necessary exposition of vulnerability. Where this mixes with pragmatism, market forces and power structures can produce messy results.
AH. Yes. That makes sense.