# Bending the rules



## Enthods (Jul 21, 2015)

To be quiet honest, I'm one to notice that if a story resembles something I've already heard of then I don't want to read or write it. By bending the rules, I'm saying that an interesting story comes from in the head and something new. Unfortunately to me the fantasy genre is taken up by white male leads. Have you ever noticed how the sign of evil is dark skinned creatures. I'm beginning my journey on a new series of writing that I hope to turn these cliches on it head. So I have two questions for you. Do you find that something original and outlandish to be interesting and something worth reading? And do you find in your readings and writings that you have a majority of white male characters, if so why?


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 21, 2015)

> Do you find that something original and outlandish to be interesting and something worth reading?



Most people on this site will tell you that being original is a Good Thing.  They will also tell you that having a diverse cast of characters is a Good Thing.

I can't really speak to the latter, but it seems the advice I find from people making a living at writing is more along the lines of: if you want to sell a lot of books, write a book as close to possible as the bestsellers in your category.

So what's your goal?

If you're a hobbyist and are writing for the passion of it, what does it matter what we think? Write that which is your passion to write.

If you really want to sell books, just write anything because the first step is to hone your craft, and that takes years of writing.

Then you can decide if you want to be original (perhaps better chance of hitting the lotto by defining a new paradigm) or if you want to a more likely path to selling solid numbers by replicating the best seller list.

Thanks.

Brian


----------



## Nimue (Jul 21, 2015)

Hoo boy, have we had this conversation before.  Originality and diversity have an innate appeal--to me, at least--but they don't guarantee a good book.  For the novice author, gathering some old themes and tropes to your breast can be a better way of getting things done, rather than trying to fight them all off in favor of something completely original.  I think diversity can be worked into anything, though, and I love reading echoes of old stories told by new voices and perspectives.  Personally, my stories are full of women and I'm consciously working to include more people of color and LGBTQA* folk.  It's been a rewarding experience so far.

What are some of the ideas and directions you're considering?


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 21, 2015)

Enthods said:


> Do you find that something original and outlandish to be interesting and something worth reading? And do you find in your readings and writings that you have a majority of white male characters, if so why?



To the first question-- yes, assuming it is also well-written, with carefully thought out plot. Basically, originality is great-- but its icing on the cake. Originality is not a substitute for more fundamental skills.

To the second question-- no. I have... seven named white characters total currently. Two haven't even been met, one is a villain, two are super-minor, one is the foreign queen, and one is actually an older, white man who is also a main character. 

I have my story set currently in a country that resembles Ottoman Empire/ Mongolia under Dayan Khan and Mandukhai. When the characters reach a country that is whiter this will change of course.

Really, I don't think its good when people try to force minorities into a story because "it's diverse." I am a huge fan of Ottoman and Mongol history, so drawing influences from there was natural and enjoyable. But the quality of the book is most important.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 21, 2015)

There is nothing intrinsically interesting about white male leads or non-white leads, of either (or any!) gender. Crappy books can be written either direction. So can brilliant books. This is a non-topic for me.


----------



## Russ (Jul 21, 2015)

I enjoy originality of all sorts for sure.  But not just for its own sake, or shock value.  So I like original but am not so big on outlandish.

The majority of my reading is dominated by white leads.  I think that simply reflects the market.

My writing is all white, but with plenty of powerful and central female characters.  That is a function primarily of the setting, and secondarily my honest recognition that I don't have the insights or skills to write genuine characters of colour. I would never want to guess or assume anything about their experience, and while I am confident I could research those topics quite well, my research time is eaten up by other projects related to my and my wife's writing right now.

Having said that, if you have an interest in writing non-white, non-male non CIS leads, you should run out and read everything that Nalo Hopkinson has published.  She represents these types of characters brilliantly.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 21, 2015)

For me there a few overarching considerations before I even think about drilling down to diversity and originality when considering quality. First, and foremost is story, is it good. Second, I consider character motivations, are they believable. Third, I consider the writing quality, is it clear. After getting through those three layers I believe the book is good. Anything beyond that is just dressing.


----------



## X Equestris (Jul 21, 2015)

I usually don't read, watch, or play things that I haven't heard positive reviews of by other people.  That saves money.  So original or not, if it captures my interest and the reviews are generally positive, I'll think about picking up a work.  

As for the race and gender of my leads for each story, I would end up having mostly white female leads, but that's because most of my work has been focused on fleshing out one character and her story.  If you looked at it the individual number of protagonists, you would find a roughly even split between male and female.  Most are white, probably somewhere close to two thirds.  That's mostly because I have been focusing on one geographical area in my fantasy world, which is overwhelmingly white.  When I've moved outside of that area, people are of whatever group that lives in the new area.


----------



## Bropocalypse (Jul 21, 2015)

My stories tend to focus on female characters by default. That is to say it's just the starting point when I invent a character. If I had to give a single reason why, it'd just be out of preference.
That said, there really is no such thing as a completely original idea, in the same sense that there's no such thing as an original ingredient to a meal. But originality isn't what anyone really looks for in a story, I think. What's truer is sincerity and legitimacy, and mastery of execution. And if you still want something 'original,' you have to combine older ideas into new ones, or find ways to bridge between seemingly unrelated ones. That leads to things that are _interesting_, which is all anyone can really ask of you.


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 21, 2015)

_Do you find that something original and outlandish to be interesting and something worth reading? _

"Something" is pretty broad but sure, I mean, what _isn't_ worth reading.

_And do you find in your readings and writings that you have a majority of white male characters, if so why? _

Yes but also, I don't really care.  As long as the character (and more importantly, the story) is good, they can be any gender or race they want to be.
I imagine that the reason for the lots of white male characters is because most of the writers I read are white males.  Because most - not all but most - of the fiction I absorb comes from the Anglophonic/western world where white men traditionally produce most fiction and tend to be the most represented and influential demographic in society.

The story I got going now has a black lesbian as the lead.  And I'm a little worried that people will think I'm trying too hard to be "diverse" or whatever since my main character fits into three "minority" demographics.  I also think that people might say that I can't write this kind of character since I'm not a lesbian.  That doesn't bother me but y'know, it could happen.

Also, I think it's a little...not-right that you describe white male leads and evil dark-skinned creatures as "rules".  I get what you're trying to say but still, I object to that.



Bropocalypse said:


> What's truer is sincerity and legitimacy, and mastery of execution



On an unrelated note: I'm going to use "Master of Execution" for my band name.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 21, 2015)

WooHooMan said:


> I also think that people might say that I can't write this kind of character since I'm not a lesbian.  That doesn't bother me but y'know, it could happen.


Don't let that worry you. I'm not a murderer, but some characters I write are stone-cold killers. 

As long as you represent characters as unique individuals & not two-dimensional stereotypes, you'll be fine. Sexuality, race, and gender are small aspects of a character's whole. They certainly aren't defining characteristics, just contributors.


----------



## Gryphos (Jul 21, 2015)

Enthods said:
			
		

> Do you find that something original and outlandish to be interesting and something worth reading?



Oh absolutely. I love originality. Obviously, it's better to be well-crafted and derivative than original and shitty. But when it comes to the subject of originality and quality I always find myself asking, is it too much to ask for both? I want both! I expect both.



> And do you find in your readings and writings that you have a majority of white male characters, if so why?



I always strive to break away from the pervasive straight white male default in my writing. In fact, in my last novel I was about half way through my second round of editing when I thought "hold on ... the main character doesn't necessarily have to be white." And he didn't, so I decided to change his ethnicity. It took a bit of tedious work to alter all the physical descriptions of him and stuff, but it was worth it just to add that little bit of representation, especially in a main protagonist.

As to women, I always try to make sure there's a substantial amount. In my current WIP I did a count of all the main characters and their sexes and found that there were four men and two women. So I reckoned "hey, why not change one of the men to a woman?" So I did, and now it's more equal. It might have been more difficult to implement the change if I wasn't still in the planning stage.

One thing I've also made an effort to do is to combat what I've dubbed the 'always male nameless'. This is basically when in a story all the nameless one-scene characters (the random passerby, the dockworker, the messenger, etc.) are almost always male. I found that strange, so in my stories when these nameless characters show up, I try to get an even mix of men and women. Case and point, in one scene in a past WIP the MC asks for directions from a dockworker. I originally wrote that dockworker to be a dude, but then I got thinking and changed them to a woman. Just little things like that I think can help.


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 21, 2015)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Don't let that worry you. I'm not a murderer, but some characters I write are stone-cold killers.
> 
> As long as you represent characters as unique individuals & not two-dimensional stereotypes, you'll be fine. Sexuality, race, and gender are small aspects of a character's whole. They certainly aren't defining characteristics, just contributors.



Hey, I've _never_ doubted that I can write this character.  I just think other people will assume I can't.



Gryphos said:


> "hold on ... the main character doesn't necessarily have to be white." And he didn't, so I decided to change his ethnicity. It took a bit of tedious work to alter all the physical descriptions of him and stuff, but it was worth it just to add that little bit of representation, especially in a main protagonist.
> 
> As to women, I always try to make sure there's a substantial amount. In my current WIP I did a count of all the main characters and their sexes and found that there were four men and two women. So I reckoned "hey, why not change one of the men to a woman?" So I did, and now it's more equal.



I don't mean to tell you to change your process or whatever - write whatever you want - but these attitudes always bothered me.

Do you ever say to yourself "well, this character doesn't have to be black, so I'll make him white".  It seems weird to make a character a specific race just because they could be.  It strikes me as almost patronizing.  And if a character's race is only skin-deep, I'd hardly call it "representation".
That same thought process extends to gender.  Like you shouldn't change a character's sex because you feel like you need to have a symmetrical cast or whatever.
I almost feel like you're doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.

But I want to stress that I'm no authority on the subject and you do whatever works for your story.  I'm just saying that adding "minorities" for the sake of adding minorities strikes me as - I honestly can't come-up with a better term - not-completely-good.


----------



## MineOwnKing (Jul 21, 2015)

Enthods said:


> Unfortunately to me the fantasy genre is taken up by white male leads.



Hold the phone. 

Are we living on the same planet?

Bustle

Best Sci Fi Books with Female Main Characters (607 books)

https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/female-protagonist

Top 25 Fantasy Books for Women


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 21, 2015)

MineOwnKing said:


> Hold the phone.
> 
> Are we living on the same planet?
> 
> ...



I'm pretty sure the fact these lists exist shows that there is a preponderance of white male leads. Admittedly, I haven't read much fantasy beyond the more famous books, but there at least white male leads are huge-- this is not to say there is anything wrong with a white male lead, or you should feel obligated to make the main character a minority for no other reason to be diverse, but the fact remains it is by far the largest denomination in the genre.


----------



## MineOwnKing (Jul 21, 2015)

DeathtoTrite said:


> I'm pretty sure the fact these lists exist shows that there is a preponderance of white male leads. Admittedly, I haven't read much fantasy beyond the more famous books, but there at least white male leads are huge-- this is not to say there is anything wrong with a white male lead, or you should feel obligated to make the main character a minority for no other reason to be diverse, but the fact remains it is by far the largest denomination in the genre.



I suppose you could be right if you added in all those white men turning into bears that need brides.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 22, 2015)

MineOwnKing said:


> I suppose you could be right if you added in all those white men turning into bears that need brides.


Can there be 7 white men and they're all brothers?


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 22, 2015)

If you like female protagonists, you should try the superhero genre (listed under fantasy at Amazon).  Prior to Christmas vacation, I went through the top sellers and bought the first five on-topic books that I hadn't read and that had tolerable writing.  All five had female protagonists.  I didn't really notice until I started comparing them in my mind in thinking about which ones I had liked the most, and I was like the one with the girl who, wait ... they all had girls.


----------



## cupiscent (Jul 22, 2015)

MineOwnKing said:


> Hold the phone. Are we living on the same planet?
> 
> Bustle
> 
> ...



First link takes as key references: _Guardians of the Galaxy_, a movie where despite the female characters having the strongest emotional story connection to the villain, the white male character is the hero who defeats him; and _Outlander_, a romance and therefore a "women's story". It further states: "Doctor Who has not featured an episode written by a woman since 2008. Season 5 of Game of Thrones will also return with zero female writers." Treatment of female characters on both those shows attracts heavy criticism.

The second link is a great list, but try suggesting that people should think about why more of those books - or indeed books by women - aren't included on sci-fi recommended reading lists, and you get slammed by a plethora of negative comments - from Tor.com just today: Conversations founded on false assumptions. Why are lists of female characters separate from "great books" lists?

The third link is also a great list, but just scanning down the first page of it, I would say 90% of them are young-adult titles, a category that is controversially but continuously demeaned, belittled, and written off as not serious literature. One wonders if that might be coincidence.

My only question about the fourth link is why on earth books with strong female protagonists should be considered "for women", if the greatness of a character has nothing to do with gender or other demographics?


----------



## Gryphos (Jul 22, 2015)

WooHooMan said:
			
		

> Do you ever say to yourself "well, this character doesn't have to be black, so I'll make him white". It seems weird to make a character a specific race just because they could be. It strikes me as almost patronizing. And if a character's race is only skin-deep, I'd hardly call it "representation".



Thing is, white people aren't the ones lacking in representation in fantasy literature. If they were, then the situation would be reversed and I would be saying 'can I make them white?' As it is, there is a disproportionate amount of white characters in our media compared to PoC characters in general, let alone any specific non-white ethnicity. As to race being only 'skin-deep', thing is ... in a fantasy world which lacks our real world cultural history, it is! There's no psychological difference or substantial biological difference. All representation is is people being able to consume media and see characters who are, even just superficially, like them. It's having media that doesn't ignore the existence of vast swathes of people.



> That same thought process extends to gender. Like you shouldn't change a character's sex because you feel like you need to have a symmetrical cast or whatever.



Why not? Seriously, actually think about it. Why not? Is it a 'deep' and 'meaningful' reason to make such a change? No. But does the reader care? No. The reader isn't going to know. Because all the characters are going to be rounded, fully developed and complex.



> But I want to stress that I'm no authority on the subject and you do whatever works for your story. I'm just saying that adding "minorities" for the sake of adding minorities strikes me as - I honestly can't come-up with a better term - not-completely-good.



So I must justify the existence of every non-white character? Justify why they're not the 'default' white? No, I'm gonna make them that way just because. Because, thing is, that's how it is in real life. Does the person behind the counter at starbucks need to justify themselves not being white? Does the bus-driver need to justify being a woman? No. People are women because they're women, and people are black because they're black. So it is in my writing. And the moment you realise that, that there doesn't need to be a reason for these underrepresented characters to exist, everything becomes so much simpler, and your world becomes so much more colourful.


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 22, 2015)

Gryphos said:


> So I must justify the existence of every non-white character? Justify why they're not the 'default' white? No, I'm gonna make them that way just because. Because, thing is, that's how it is in real life. Does the person behind the counter at starbucks need to justify themselves not being white? Does the bus-driver need to justify being a woman? No. People are women because they're women, and people are black because they're black. So it is in my writing.



Ok, like I said: do whatever you want.  I don't care that much.
I just have my own little bizarre issues with the virtues of "representation and diversity" and I was using your post to get going on that rant.



Gryphos said:


> And the moment you realise that, that there doesn't need to be a reason for these underrepresented characters to exist, everything becomes so much simpler, and your world becomes so much more colourful.



I take some exception to this closing line: I feel like you're accusing me of having a "colorless" world.  I've written a good number of underrepresented characters but I usually base characters' races on the story's setting.  And they're are variables that lead me to decide gender.  

Maybe I'm just being defensive.  I'm sure you didn't mean any kind of offense.


----------



## Gryphos (Jul 22, 2015)

WooHooMan said:


> I take some exception to this closing line: I feel like you're accusing me of having a "colorless" world.  I've written a good number of underrepresented characters but I usually base characters' races on the story's setting.  And they're are variables that lead me to decide gender.
> 
> Maybe I'm just being defensive.  I'm sure you didn't mean any kind of offense.



I'm sorry if I sounded accusatory. I did not mean to suggest that your stories lack diversity or anything like that. I was just making a general comment on how abandoning the notion that anything differing from the white male default must have a reason will open up new horizons to any writer.


----------



## SeverinR (Jul 22, 2015)

Last time I checked, 
The consensus was the people in the know were looking for good books with prominent female characters. Some even suggested LGBT might open some doors too.

Personally, I don't think anyone needs to justify any race of human or any color skinned non-human race. The "common" fantasy story is usually Euro oriented, so Euro races are common. But if you write Oriental or African based fantasy then those would be the norm.  That isn't to say that other human races don't belong, they are just a minority, small minority or large minority would be up to the author's setting.  I would also offer, if the city/town you write about has a transportation system,(ship trade, over land trade route) then more "foreigners" would be expected.  I would also say, more crime in those cities too, not because of minorities but because of the desperate people searching for a better life, using skills to keep themselves alive in other then legal ways.


----------



## Nimue (Jul 22, 2015)

I feel like this must have been posted before, but maybe it hasn't: the Medieval POC (people of color) blog.

It's a resource blog that documents the many, many examples of non-white people in European art history, and sometimes just history.  It's a tumblr, so there is some back-and-forth and dumb anonymous question rebuttal, but it has some fantastic examples of POC presence in Early Modern, Medieval, and even pre-Medieval Europe.  Really makes you reconsider the "historically accurate!" argument for 100% white medieval settings.  Basically, as long as people have been trading and sailing and traveling, there has been diversity in any given setting.  And while the average person wouldn't have been black or Asian or Middle-Eastern--since when are fantasy protagonists average people?


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 22, 2015)

Gryphos said:


> I'm sorry if I sounded accusatory. I did not mean to suggest that your stories lack diversity or anything like that. I was just making a general comment on how abandoning the notion that anything differing from the white male default must have a reason will open up new horizons to any writer.



I can agree that there are benefits to writing characters of differing races and genders but I also think that there should be a reason for a character to be of a specific race (white or otherwise) or gender.  Usually, I find that setting is the deciding factor...



SeverinR said:


> The "common" fantasy story is usually Euro oriented, so Euro races are common. But if you write Oriental or African based fantasy then those would be the norm.  That isn't to say that other human races don't belong, they are just a minority, small minority or large minority would be up to the author's setting.  I would also offer, if the city/town you write about has a transportation system,(ship trade, over land trade route) then more "foreigners" would be expected.



This is what I'm talking about.

The story I got going now has a setting based on North African trade cities (Casablanca, Alexandria, etc.) so the main character is black while the white characters are foreigners or from foreign families.  The cast, as a whole, is representative of the setting's population.  The cast is also primarily women since the story deals with a woman-dominated career field.

If I was writing a story set in Ireland or a setting based on Ireland, I'd make the main character white since Ireland is mostly white.  Sure, the character _could_ be a black but it makes more sense to go with white given the setting.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 22, 2015)

Nimue,

As you know, diversity isn't one of my hot button topics, but you might be proud of me: I added a POC (Hispanic is POC, right?) in to my WIP today. (Truthfully, that's not really that rare for me; my niece is Brazilian/American, and if I ever get around to that alien invasion series bouncing around in my head, I plan to very loosely base one of the protagonists on her.)

I needed to cast the director of the Superhero Institute (haven't come up with an appropriate moniker for the organization yet; that's a placeholder.).  It's a minor role but may expand if I work this into a series.  I think the natural choice to create conflict is to have the director work against the protagonist, but, sometimes, I think it's better to go against expectations.

Anyway, so I'm looking at Seventh Sanctum (for minor characters, I generate a list of 50 names and pull a first name and a last name that I like) and decided that Carlos Guerra sounded right. With the exception of characters that I create to honor people that I know, I don't think I ever start with a character by saying, "I want him/her to be this race."  Instead, I just go with what speaks to me.  (One of the things that I really like about writing is that, while I tend to be very analytical overall, I like giving myself over to pure spontaneous creativity.)

Now that I read back over this post, I'm have no idea what the point is ...

Oh well.

Thanks.

Brian


----------



## Nimue (Jul 22, 2015)

Well, I think it's cool!  Since you're in the brainstorming phase, it's really the best time to consider different identities for your characters.  See who they could be!  And you're working with a modern setting, so you've really got no limits in terms of ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

I do think that going with "what feels right" can end up with white-by-default syndrome, but if you consciously consider different images and, hey, names for a character and then see how you feel, it can lead in different directions.


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 22, 2015)

Gryphos said:


> So I must justify the existence of every non-white character? Justify why they're not the 'default' white? No, I'm gonna make them that way just because. Because, thing is, that's how it is in real life. Does the person behind the counter at starbucks need to justify themselves not being white? Does the bus-driver need to justify being a woman? No. People are women because they're women, and people are black because they're black. So it is in my writing. And the moment you realise that, that there doesn't need to be a reason for these underrepresented characters to exist, everything becomes so much simpler, and your world becomes so much more colourful.



People are black because Europeans engaged in the slave trade (assuming you're not living in Africa). The Anglo-Saxons in the Byzantine Empire in the 11th century where there because of William the Conqueror. People of different ethnic origins do NOT just pop up. This includes if you have a say, a Mesoamerican setting and a white person pops up. 

If your setting is a metropolitan trading hub-- like the silk road or Istanbul in the 16th century-- then having many different races is more normal-- Turks in Istanbul at times number less than 50% of all inhabitants. 

My characters skin color is an important part of who they are-- two have a very dark complexion because they are from a nomadic race that moved into a white area. Another is somewhat paler because, though she is from the same nomadic race, her family has intermingled with the more white locals. Just changing it because you can shows that skin color has no culture attached to it-- which could be an interesting concept in its own right, if that's what you were going for.

On a somewhat unrelated note, I really hate that diversity in middle ages tumblr. It basically takes whatever pictures supports its argument while ignoring the vast amounts of literature and artwork which do not. This makes up a tiny minority of the population in your average poor, backwards European country.


----------



## Nimue (Jul 22, 2015)

The point of the tumblr isn't to say that POC were in the majority or absolutely everywhere. It's that they existed in Europe, and that saying there were no non-white people living in Medieval Europe is not historically accurate.  *You never see these images in other places,* and that's why I find that blog to be so valuable.  Yes, of course the majority of Northern Europe was white, nobody is claiming otherwise.  But artwork with black or other POC figures has been historically diminished, miscategorized in museums, and even painted over in the past because of the attitudes of the 19th and 20th centuries.

I'm not sure that we disagree, except that there was more travel between populations than you seem to be giving credit for.  There were black people in England prior to the beginning of the Caribbean slave trade, I can show you evidence of that.  But if  your reaction to this part of the historical record is defensiveness and not curiosity, I can't help you much.


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 22, 2015)

Nimue said:


> I'm not sure that we disagree, except that there was more travel between populations than you seem to be giving credit for.  There were black people in England prior to the beginning of the Caribbean slave trade, I can show you evidence of that.  But if  your reaction to this part of the historical record is defensiveness and not curiosity, I can't help you much.



Its more that the tumblr seems to imply "There were minorities in Western Europe, therefore you must include them as a main character" 

"Because you wouldn't want to be historically inaccurate." is still a perfectly valid response to including few/none minorities, especially in extremely rural areas-- the Mani Peninsula is a great example of just how isolated some areas were. In Mani, a peninsula in Southern Greece, they worshiped the Hellenic Pantheon until the 11th century. And they were only a few hundred miles from Constantinople, then the center of the world and capital of the byzantine empire. For hundreds of years, this place was THAT isolated. 

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be defensive about. Some bones recently discovered in Ireland come from Axum in the 9th century. I'm saying that, for the most part, Europe was a backwards, isolated, xenophobic and overwhelmingly rural. This isn't even so much a writing point as a historical one. And it is simply that Europe was incredibly homogeneous, with your average peasants not going more than 10 miles from their place of birth.


----------



## Nimue (Jul 22, 2015)

I'm getting some defensiveness from "I really hate that blog." Why? It's literally just showing images of the Middle Ages that we don't often see from other channels.



DeathtoTrite said:


> "There were minorities in Western Europe, therefore you must include them as a main character"


I've followed that tumblr for more than a year; I can tell you that's not the message at all.  It's not even a writing blog.



> "Because you wouldn't want to be historically inaccurate."


The tagline is a tongue-in-cheek response to all the people saying that including any POC at all in medieval _fiction_ and usually _fantasy_ would be "historically inaccurate".  The message of the blog is about combating the "there were only white people!" attitude, not enforcing quotas or something.



> And it is simply that Europe was incredibly homogeneous, with your average peasants not going more than 10 miles from their place of birth.


Sure.  Historically.  Meanwhile, fantasy protagonists are crossing kingdoms and visiting cities and royal courts, and it's still "unrealistic" for them to meet people who aren't white.  Fantasy isn't confined by history--and even if it were, there were POC in European history.

If you want to have an all-white cast, you can do that.  But it's your choice--it hasn't been decided for you by history, leaving you helpless to write otherwise.  History is far richer and more varied than most people give it credit for.


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 22, 2015)

Okay, I think we're pretty much just disagreeing on semantics at this point. I just don't like the vibe I get from some people who feel compelled to include a POC for no other reason than diversity, especially when it has no impact besides them being POC.


----------



## Gryphos (Jul 22, 2015)

DeathtoTrite said:


> Okay, I think we're pretty much just disagreeing on semantics at this point. I just don't like the vibe I get from some people who feel compelled to include a POC for no other reason than diversity, especially when it has no impact besides them being POC.



I don't like the vibe I get from some people who feel compelled to include white people for no other reason than uniformity, especially when it has no impact besides them being white.

See how silly that sounds?


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 22, 2015)

> I do think that going with "what feels right" can end up with white-by-default syndrome, but if you consciously consider different images and, hey, names for a character and then see how you feel, it can lead in different directions.



I don't necessarily disagree, and I have no desire to enter into the type of discussion these kinds of statements tend to lead to.  But (oh, c'mon, you knew that "but" was coming  ) I did have two thoughts when I read this:

1. For me, the characters that "feel right" to me, I think, are mostly based on what I'm used to.  Not what I'm used to reading; what I'm used to seeing/dealing with on a daily basis.

We live in a global world (  - love that phrase; laugh every time I get to use it), and I don't think that most people are surrounded by a completely homogeneous environment.  It feels natural for me to include someone of Hispanic background because I know/work with a lot of people that fit that description.

2. My outlining is going really well.  It seems to work something like this:

I started by assuming a certain number of chapters based on my typical average word count per chapter and my desired word count for the book.  I divided the chapters into Acts and put certain signposts at certain chapters throughout - for example, Chapter 8 is the first Door of No Return.

Before I ever start a book, I have a good idea of who the protagonist is, what the significant situation is, what the first Door is, and in general, the first several chapters.

So I started outlining chapters 1 and 2.  Going into 3, which I had clear in my mind, I'm like, "What happens after 3?"  No idea.  The story basically disappeared into the foggy abyss that I couldn't penetrate.

My response: I took out this black box and input what I knew thus far and where I needed the story to go.  Waited a little while.  Got the response telling me what happens in Chapters 4 through 7.

Now this black box containing my imagination seems like something given to me by space aliens.  I know that, inside, there has to be some logical technology driving it, but that technology seems so advanced that it might as well be magic.  I'm afraid that, if I try to examine it too closely, I'll break it.

All that to say: I can't explain how my process works.  If I need to input something, like a POC, it seems to accommodate the request pretty well.  I live in mortal fear, however, that one day I'm going to type in my inputs and nothing is going to come out.

I'm really hesitant, therefore, to try to advise anyone on what their creative process should look like.  Best I can say is, "This is what I do.  If it helps, great.  If not, sorry."

I, and this is just me, would be hesitant to tell someone that they need to do something specific like change their method of choosing characters.


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 22, 2015)

Gryphos said:


> I don't like the vibe I get from some people who feel compelled to include white people for no other reason than uniformity, especially when it has no impact besides them being white.
> 
> See how silly that sounds?




Seriously? I'm sorry, but that's not what I said at all. I find creating a western european feudal style world were everyone is white, and then throwing in one POC with little/no logic is stupid. I would find it equally stupid if a white person showed up in the middle of a book with a setting based on Uyghurstan. 

Have you ever seen Robin Hood, with Alan Rickman? Great movie, and Azeem was a really neat addition. I really enjoyed having Azeem there. 

What I wouldn't like is if Azeem could be white and nothing would change. If you've seen the movie, you know that's impossible; Azeem being a Muslim in England and having a different skin tone had interesting consequences for him(I still laugh at the scene he is trying to find east but can't in the terrible English weather).

I would like to point out, that I don't write about white people. Of my four POV characters, one is white. Of the two dozen or so characters at one court, two are white. This was not a conscious decision on my part. I happened to have read a lot of books about the Mongol and Ottoman Empires, and wanted to see them in fantasy equivalents.


----------



## Nimue (Jul 22, 2015)

I think you're talking about tokenism here, which is absolutely not what I'm advocating.  Don't just switch someone's skin tone if you're not going to go through the process of thinking about how that affects them as a character--unless this is a fantasy world where race has no implication.  It's not what MedievalPOC is about, either.  It focuses on cultural intersection, and often there will be a brief biography of a figure in a painting if there's enough information, about their lives and you can see the way that race and culture influenced them.

I just think that the approach of "POC characters can only appear in designated settings" can be damaging when so many modern readers have experienced life as a minority.  It also brings up echoes of an unpleasant "they should stay where they belong" line of thinking. You're shutting down a whole range of stories that readers might identify with.  The way that modern society has come about makes images and stories of POC in a dominant European setting particularly valuable.


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 22, 2015)

Nimue said:


> I think you're talking about tokenism here, which is absolutely not what I'm advocating.  Don't just switch someone's skin tone if you're not going to go through the process of thinking about how that affects them as a character--unless this is a fantasy world where race has no implication.  It's not what MedievalPOC is about, either.  It focuses on cultural intersection, and often there will be a brief biography of a figure in a painting if there's enough information, about their lives and you can see the way that race and culture influenced them.
> 
> I just think that the approach of "POC characters can only appear in designated settings" can be damaging when so many modern readers have experienced life as a minority.  It also brings up echoes of an unpleasant "they should stay where they belong" line of thinking. You're shutting down a whole range of stories that readers might identify with.  The way that modern society has come about makes images and stories of POC in a dominant European setting particularly valuable.



Yeah, that's exactly my point. A character's race, gender, etc. should be part of their identity-- not a defining characteristic-- but a part. And I'm fine with including diverse characters, my only caveat is essentially to make sure you maintain suspension of disbelief with their motivations for being where they are. 

Another thing you should realize is the way I write-- I go into incredibly detailed world-building with how different cultures exist, have intermingled, migrated, etc. so in this hyper-detailed context I would expect more of an explanation for just about anything.


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 22, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> We live in a global world (  - love that phrase; laugh every time I get to use it), and I don't think that most people are surrounded by a completely homogeneous environment.  It feels natural for me to include someone of Hispanic background because I know/work with a lot of people that fit that description.



Dude, you didn't sign your post.  I didn't know if it was you who posted it or not.

But seriously: in more modern or cosmopolitan, having a minority/PoC character because "it feels right" is as good a reason as any.  I think we're mostly talking about settings based on historical periods which tend to be more racially homogeneous.



DeathtoTrite said:


> Yeah, that's exactly my point. A character's race, gender, etc. should be part of their identity-- not a defining characteristic-- but a part. And I'm fine with including diverse characters, my only caveat is essentially to make sure you maintain suspension of disbelief with their motivations for being where they are.



A part: not a defining characteristic but also not a negligible aspect of their appearance.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 22, 2015)

WooHooMan said:


> Dude, you didn't sign your post.  I didn't know if it was you who posted it or not.
> 
> But seriously: in more modern or cosmopolitan, having a minority/PoC character because "it feels right" is as good a reason as any.  I think we're mostly talking about settings based on historical periods which tend to be more racially homogeneous.
> 
> ...



I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't tend to think of my fantasy characters as humans at all ...


----------



## ChasingSuns (Jul 23, 2015)

Nimue said:


> I think you're talking about tokenism here, which is absolutely not what I'm advocating.  Don't just switch someone's skin tone if you're not going to go through the process of thinking about how that affects them as a character--unless this is a fantasy world where race has no implication.  It's not what MedievalPOC is about, either.  It focuses on cultural intersection, and often there will be a brief biography of a figure in a painting if there's enough information, about their lives and you can see the way that race and culture influenced them.
> 
> I just think that the approach of "POC characters can only appear in designated settings" can be damaging when so many modern readers have experienced life as a minority.  It also brings up echoes of an unpleasant "they should stay where they belong" line of thinking. You're shutting down a whole range of stories that readers might identify with.  The way that modern society has come about makes images and stories of POC in a dominant European setting particularly valuable.



Yeah it definitely bugs me when people don't give certain characteristics of a character enough thought in general. Also, I do take issue with changing a character to a POC simply for money. I don't even have a problem if it's just for the sake of diversity, but if it is obviously just to make money and the story suffers because the creator didn't think it through, then that is a huge issue for me. But that kinda goes across the board with anything really. I could say the same about my opinions on anything that is done for money and not for the story.


----------



## Russ (Jul 23, 2015)

ChasingSuns said:


> Yeah it definitely bugs me when people don't give certain characteristics of a character enough thought in general. Also, I do take issue with changing a character to a POC simply for money. I don't even have a problem if it's just for the sake of diversity, but if it is obviously just to make money and the story suffers because the creator didn't think it through, then that is a huge issue for me. But that kinda goes across the board with anything really. I could say the same about my opinions on anything that is done for money and not for the story.



Story don't pay the rent.


----------



## Russ (Jul 23, 2015)

DeathtoTrite said:


> Seriously? I'm sorry, but that's not what I said at all. I find creating a western european feudal style world were everyone is white, and then throwing in one POC with little/no logic is stupid. I would find it equally stupid if a white person showed up in the middle of a book with a setting based on Uyghurstan.



I don't recall anyone advocating doing that.  Did I miss that?


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 23, 2015)

Russ said:


> I don't recall anyone advocating doing that.  Did I miss that?



Gryphos's post seemed to think I was calling for white as generic, that's all. My point is that anyone off-culture should be a fully-fleshed character with a reason for being in the midst of a foreign culture-- even something as simple as a merchant.


----------



## Russ (Jul 23, 2015)

DeathtoTrite said:


> Gryphos's post seemed to think I was calling for white as generic, that's all. My point is that anyone off-culture should be a fully-fleshed character with a reason for being in the midst of a foreign culture-- even something as simple as a merchant.



Gotcha.  That makes sense.


----------



## ChasingSuns (Jul 23, 2015)

Russ said:


> Story don't pay the rent.



Very true, but if you look at something like GoT, you see characters of a variety of ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. And it all fits, it all makes sense. But if you just throw things into the story without giving it the adequate amount of thought, then it tends to come out bad. At least, IMO


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 24, 2015)

> I could say the same about my opinions on anything that is done for money and not for the story.



My goal as a writer is to entertain people.

My dream is to be so good at entertaining people that I can quit my day job.

I think that the way to achieve both is to give readers what they want.

It seems to me that a certain element "making me money" means that that element is a value proposition for my reader.  To me, I see that as a good thing.

The problem with "not for the story" is that that concept usually translates, when you get right down to it, to the writer doing what the writer wants instead of what the reader wants.

EDIT: My apologies if that last sentence comes across as overly harsh.  I get frustrated sometimes at "artists" who seem to peer down their noses at writers who seek simply to entertain.  It's one thing to hear such from people writing literary fiction, but, c'mon, you're in a forum dedicated to genre fiction here.


----------



## Russ (Jul 24, 2015)

ChasingSuns said:


> Very true, but if you look at something like GoT, you see characters of a variety of ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. And it all fits, it all makes sense. But if you just throw things into the story without giving it the adequate amount of thought, then it tends to come out bad. At least, IMO



But that was not your point.  In your suggestion you said that choosing money over story (or more accurately your objective view of story) is a mistake.  For people's who goal it is to make money, it is the right choice, and on some artistic levels it may very well be the right choice as well.


----------

