Advice or help finding cultural consultants/collaborators?

[skip.knox]

Yes. I realize that can feel daunting but it really is the best avenue. When the time comes to consult area experts, you'll be able to ask focused questions and will get better replies.

My question to you, Draco Roma , still stands. Assuming you find a cultural consultant who is will to donate time and attention, how will you judge what you are told? That consultant, after all, might be a novice to the field. Or they might be native to the culture but will certainly come with their own prejudices--just think of any culture you know well; are the people therein all equally well-versed and fair-minded?

 

[Draco Roma]

Thank you for your advice and question skip.knox.

I guess the best way I can phrase it is that I would use conversations with cultural consultants to supplement the research I've already done, and the research I still have to do. Maybe they can point me towards more sources to research. Maybe they contradict some of the sources I've already found. While people within a culture might dissagree on different aspects of it, and not everyone is an expert on their own culture, lived experience is still important to learn about, because it is that lived experience that I am basing my work off of, and that lived experience that people will compare my work to. Not to mention, one cannot have a dialog with a text, speak with and discuss ideas it, test methods.

These are the things I am already prepared to do for my work. Thank you for your question, I hope I was able to answer it well.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Being writers, I believe we have a responsibility with what we write. If our goal is to make the world a better place

I personally disagree with this idea. Of course, if you want, then by all means try to make the world a better place with your writing. But in no way is it the responsibility of the writer to do so. If you just want to tell a nice story and leave it at that, then there's nothing wrong with that. It is not a writer's responsibility to have enough female characters or POC or minorities represented in their story. It's their choice, and they can make a very different choice if they want, in the same way that readers can choose to either read something or not.

That doesn't mean that all research can just go out the window of course. It often leads to better stories if your characters aren't just a collection of (incorrect) tropes. If you have a character with ADHD in your story, then if he's close to how people with ADHD are he'll be a stronger character. But there is no law that says that you must do this, or that you must include these characters in your story. If you want to tell a tale of 9 guys going on a brotherly quest to save the world and defeat the dark lord, then by all means just do so and tell that story, and don't worry about not having enough women in the story or portraying the followers of the dark lord as the bad guys or whatever.

As for offending people, if you can't offend anyone, then you can't tell a good story. I think John Cleese put it best (when talking about comedy):

 

[Draco Roma]

It often leads to better stories if your characters aren't just a collection of (incorrect) tropes. If you have a character with ADHD in your story, then if he's close to how people with ADHD are he'll be a stronger character.

I think this is what Fyri meant. That, yes, you don't have to always go out of your way for things, but that you shouldn't fall back on harmful tropes when you choose to depict certain things.

So many harmful tropes and ideas are perpetuated by writers not challenging them. And while, yes, there's no way to not offend everyone, there's also things we definitely should avoid in our writing because it is hurtful. Things like the way neurodivergence is treated, or tropes that misrepresent and reduce entire groups down to a few unflattering traits. These things do have a very real impact on people's lives, giving some people an excuse to keep treating these groups badly.

In my opinion, it's something that goes beyond just simple sensitivity. It's about caring about your audience and putting the effort in to understand the people you depict and the people who might read your work.

 

[Fyri]

I personally disagree with this idea. Of course, if you want, then by all means try to make the world a better place with your writing. But in no way is it the responsibility of the writer to do so. If you just want to tell a nice story and leave it at that, then there's nothing wrong with that. It is not a writer's responsibility to have enough female characters or POC or minorities represented in their story. It's their choice, and they can make a very different choice if they want, in the same way that readers can choose to either read something or not.

That doesn't mean that all research can just go out the window of course. It often leads to better stories if your characters aren't just a collection of (incorrect) tropes. If you have a character with ADHD in your story, then if he's close to how people with ADHD are he'll be a stronger character. But there is no law that says that you must do this, or that you must include these characters in your story. If you want to tell a tale of 9 guys going on a brotherly quest to save the world and defeat the dark lord, then by all means just do so and tell that story, and don't worry about not having enough women in the story or portraying the followers of the dark lord as the bad guys or whatever.

As for offending people, if you can't offend anyone, then you can't tell a good story. I think John Cleese put it best (when talking about comedy):

Ah, perhaps I should rephrase.

I don't mean that everyone's goal is to make the world a better place. Certainly, everyone has different goals and reasons to write.

However, I do believe that we are at least partly responsible for what we write and the effect it has on the world. Writing a story that excludes certain groups is fine--quite realistic too! I'm definitely not saying stories need to include and represent everyone. That is impossible and not a good reason to have a character anyway. That's also how we end up with token characters. Not good.

However, if your story happens to include a black character/s, that story is going to affect society in a different way, and I believe it is good to be concious of the effect we may have on real people when we represent them in our stories. Of course, there is no hard and fast rule for any of this. Stereotypes aren't all wrong. But when someone does seek consultants, the work and intentions show in the end product. ^_^

These things do have a very real impact on people's lives, giving some people an excuse to keep treating these groups badly.

^^^ This, specifically! <3

The more we write about Asian characters being really good at math, the more children *and adults * expect that of Asian people. Thus, making an Asian person who struggles in math feel even worse and broken--not belonging to their heritage, and an Asian person who tried really hard to succeed in science feel less accomplished because apparently it was supposed to come naturally because people make comments like "Of course, the *Asian* kid did that."

Of course, this is an obvious example. Also, doesn't necessarily mean we *shouldn't* write something that happens to be a stereotype. Stereotypes have some truth to them--Asian people *can* be really good at STEM. Autistic savants *do* exists. However, being aware how and that they are stereotypes helps one make an informed decision on how/if one includes them in a story.

The reason I seek consultants is because they are often more aware of other stereotypes that my community doesn't have a clue about! Then, I go to research what my consultant tells me--or, if I'm lucky, I have multiple people of that demographic to weigh feedback against, just like with general beta readers. Ideally, these consultants can also function as a general beta reader!

In the end, fiction is based off reality, but I've also noticed that reality is influenced by fiction. What we write affects the world, even if only in small ways.

 

[Fyri]

As for offending people, if you can't offend anyone, then you can't tell a good story. I think John Cleese put it best (when talking about comedy):

This is useful to keep in mind! However, I think it is missing the point a little. It is also a little different coming from a person who is not part of the comminities in question (John Cleese is great, but in this conversation, he *is* a cis-white het(?) man...). It's not that we don't want to offend, per se. It is more, we don't want to perpetuate unnecessarily harmful beliefs to a community that is already struggling under them.

It is also, perhaps, a little different when speaking about genres. Generally, you go into comedy with different expectations than romance or fantasy. You're expecting things (potentially yourself) to get made fun of. You know it is a joke and not a sincerely held belief or expectation.

But! I'm not meaning to sound like I'm trying to tell anyone what to do and how to write! I hope I'm not coming off that way. We all must do what we personally believe is right or okay! Seek consultants, don't seek consultants! The world is chaos and no one really knows what they're doing! I sure don't!

 

[Draco Roma]

However, being aware how and that they are stereotypes helps one make an informed decision on how/if one includes them in a story.

My best example for this is the autistic representation in The Predator. The character was introduced very stereotypically autistic: non-verbal, mumbling, walking around, hands over the ears, very easily upset. And in that single scene, I didn't think much of it, because there are people like that. But then, for the whole rest of the movie, the kid is just a savant. Barely any depth to his character, barely any autistic traits. And this was extremely hurtful, not just to me as an audience member (and I certainly can just walk away from the movie), but to all autistic people. Because a representation like that says that even if someone can "seem normal" when they are autistic, autism still always presents *that way*. No matter how "normal" they act, that behavior is autism. It encourages the abelist behavior autistic people already deal with. It tells people to not challenge their opinions on autism. It hurts to be reduced down to something that I don't even do personally

 

[Finchbearer]

Personally I thought The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time is a good example of a portrayal of a character with autism. Sure, that is not a depiction of how autism and neurodivergence is for everyone who has it, but I thought it very cleverly done.

 

[Fyri]

Personally I thought The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time is a good example of a portrayal of a character with autism. Sure, that is not a depiction of how autism and neurodivergence is for everyone who has it, but I thought it very cleverly done.

I haven't actually heard of that one! But yes, that is something I learned while researching and getting autistic betas. The quote goes "If you've met one autistic person, you've met one autistic person."

In such a way, there is truth to the caution of not everyone has the same opinions or experiences to give you feedback for. Thus, if you want to do representation well, a combination is highly recommended--research, consultants, and what you think is right. There may still be problems after that, but likely a lot less than if you neglected one of these.

Also, to keep in mind--your character is also just one person of this represented group. They aren’t gonna clear all flags or be perfect. They're a person, not a label.

 

[Finchbearer]

The quote goes "If you've met one autistic person, you've met one autistic person."

The Dog in the Night Time follows the story of a young boy, which does not represent all the those who are autistic. More males are diagnosed in general with ASD compared to females and I am yet to see a story that represents autism that can speak to a more female experience of it.

And whilst I think this is particularly true for something as varied as autism - I think it is really the same for other underrepresented and poorly represented groups such as women, people of colour, LGBT+ and the disabled.

Meet one women and she is not going to be the de facto spokesperson for all women. Certainly research with care. I do think that there is potential when finding specific sensitivity readers they are going to be coming in with specific biases.

In cultural terms I think it’s much the same. I’m from Yorkshire for example, and so one Yorkshireman is not going to be able to be the cultural ambassador for all Yorkshirefolk. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read an American authored book that has tried to set their story in England and got so many things wrong - but in many cases I might enjoy the story enough to give them an A+ for effort.

 

[Fyri]

The Dog in the Night Time follows the story of a young boy, which does not represent all the those who are autistic. More males are diagnosed in general with ASD compared to females and I am yet to see a story that represents autism that can speak to a more female experience of it.

On the Edge of Gone!!!! <3 by Corinne Dyvis

Also, for tv shows, I'd point to "Everything's Gonna Be Okay" as well as "As We See It"

All have amazing Ownvoices representations for female autism!