Diversity Lioness misfire?

[Devor]

And to be quite honest, that character--as described--is hitting just about all the markers of the madonna/whore thing for me. (This is a good starting point: Madonna–Whore Complex - TV Tropes).

I just wanted to say that part of my family comes from an Jersey-Italian background, and they've always explained the Madonna/Whore thing as something else entirely. As I was told, it's when the guy treats you like the sacred Madonna when you first meet, and then like a whore after you're married or together a while. It's something that's let a lot of real a-holes make a lot of women very miserable.

It's an example of how I am often struck by how "small" many offenses feel to me in comparison to the things I've experienced. This portrayal just strikes me as so . . . . I guess, inconsequential, I would say.

Don't get me wrong. I did see the sassy sexual untouchable black girl stereotype thing. I didn't find it appropriate. But we're all affected by our own background lens shifting our perspective of how important things are.

 

[Graylorne]

Don't get me wrong. I did see the sassy sexual untouchable black girl stereotype thing. I didn't find it appropriate. But we're all affected by our own background lens shifting our perspective of how important things are.

Only it wasn't the sassy etc.
Imagine the Kell culture (as told in the story) - male and female roles were reversed. The women had the dominant roles, the men were weak and served. No marriages, at most a consenting partnership. The girl had no reason whatsoever to flaunt her sexuality, no male would have refused her. The young wisewomen were proud of their bodies, and there being no nudity taboo, liked to show it. (No sexual taboo either, but anything else than consensual sex was considered not done.) Maud warned Jurgis the girl was a deathtrap, because a girl as haughty and touchy as Wemawee could react unpleasantly to any impertinence. (Not that Jurgis would have done so.)
Besides, Wemawee is a late MC, who learns a lot about the world in only a few chapters.

I had expected comments on the rather free sexual mores in general, but the Madonna/Whore-complex doesn't fit anything I wrote.

 

[Jabrosky]

Only it wasn't the sassy etc.
Imagine the Kell culture (as told in the story) - male and female roles were reversed. The women had the dominant roles, the men were weak and served. No marriages, at most a consenting partnership. The girl had no reason whatsoever to flaunt her sexuality, no male would have refused her. The young wisewomen were proud of their bodies, and there being no nudity taboo, liked to show it. (No sexual taboo either, but anything else than consensual sex was considered not done.) Maud warned Jurgis the girl was a deathtrap, because a girl as haughty and touchy as Wemawee could react unpleasantly to any impertinence. (Not that Jurgis would have done so.)
Besides, Wemawee is a late MC, who learns a lot about the world in only a few chapters.

I had expected comments on the rather free sexual mores in general, but the Madonna/Whore-complex doesn't fit anything I wrote.

Whatever may be said of your setting's sexual mores, or the Kells' gender reversal, I didn't get the impression that your Wemawee character was meant to represent the Kells in general, let alone black women from our world. In that excerpt, she didn't conduct herself the way Maud or Hala have in what I've read so far (I'm about to start Ch. 8 now). And I can tell from both your comments here and the book itself that you've put more thought into your characterization and world-building than I'd expect from a writer dependent on stereotypes.

The key problem with stereotypes isn't that they're never drawn from real differences, or that you can't find a few individuals in a group who coincide with them in at least one way. You could even say African characters having dark skin is technically a stereotype that glosses over albino individuals, or maybe North African Arabs and South African Dutch. The problem is that stereotypes are by nature simplifications, or caricatures, of complex truths, and are therefore lazy characterization.

 

[Devor]

Only it wasn't the sassy etc.

Graylorne, don't take this the wrong way, but there's now an excerpt that we're looking at, and that kind of trumps your comments.

The excerpt has a young black woman, an elder, flaunting her sexuality while remaining so untouchable as to "take your manhood" if you try. But it's more than that. This isn't just this one character with her own personality; it's what their elders do. That's not working out here.

 

[Graylorne]

One more thing. I'm trying to take Paul at his word that he was striving for something other than what I interpreted things to be, but I find it utterly amazing how he could consistently not only hit so many wrong notes, he bullseyed them (sorry for the mixed metaphors). Going back to the misappropriation of the black female image , here's an excerpt provided in the media kit for the book tour.

EXCERPT 5 — FROM CHAPTER 21
On his way forward, Jurgis stopped, his need to piss forgotten as a young girl came up the gangway. She was a Kell, nearly as black as Maud, but with her hair made up as a bird’s nest, and dressed in a flowing robe of gauze as thin as cobweb that betrayed every inch of the strong body underneath.
‘You, male!’ she said in a tone that roused hot rage in Jurgis’ breast. ‘I am seeking the Lioness Maud of the M’Brannoe. Tell her I come for her.’
Jurgis closed his mouth with an audible snap. He’d met plenty rough girls in Brisa. Harbor whores, tavern wenches, pickpockets; all coarse and often foul-mouthed women, but none had ever displayed the soul-wrenching arrogance of this barely dressed chit.
The girl frowned at his silence. ‘Are you dumb, male? Go quickly, and warn the lioness I am here. Jump to it.’
‘Well, it’s that you ask it so kindly,’ Jurgis said. ‘And who might you be?’
‘Don’t be impertinent!’ The girl’s eyes flashed. ‘My name is not your concern. Go and fetch the lioness.’
Without another word, Jurgis strode back to their cabin. He slammed the door shut behind him and Maud turned around, her sheathed sword in her hand. ‘Something wrong?’
Jurgis cursed. ‘There’s a girl come on board. A terribly arrogant, snotty girl in the most nekkid robe I ever saw. She wants to see you.’
‘A naked robe?’ Maud frowned. ‘Then she’s a wisewoman. The young ones like to go about in transparent drapes.’ She prodded Jurgis’ breastbone with a finger. ‘Don’t you believe for a moment her dress has anything to do with her being hot and cuddlesome. A wisewoman isn’t a warrioress. We’re generally easygoing; they are the opposite, and this girl’s nakedness is a deadly trap. She’d remove the manhood of any offender even quicker than I would.’
Jurgis growled. ‘That ill-mannered child cuddlesome? I’d rather mount one of those pewbara cats.’
‘Much safer. Was she alone?’
Jurgis thought back and shook his head. ‘No. She had an attendant. A boy. He wasn’t much bigger than I and looked scared as hell.’
Maud sighed. ‘They sent us a difficult one.’
‘Not all your wisewomen are wise?’
‘Forget it. They’re no better than warlocks.’

In addition to the Kell warriors constantly being in 'Fight or **** mode (sic), our introduction to a Kell Wisewoman- a future leader of their society- is of her flaunting her sexuality, parading around practically naked yet daring someone to approach her because of it. Remind you of anything?

Devor, here is the whole fragment. Where does it say ' flaunt?' She's walking around almost nude, yes. Is that flaunting? Is a nudist camp flaunting? To me, showing your body is only flaunting when you aim to arouse others. She doesn't.

The other remark, about their elders, I don't understand.

 

[Devor]

‘A naked robe?’ Maud frowned. ‘Then she’s a wisewoman. The young ones like to go about in transparent drapes.’ She prodded Jurgis’ breastbone with a finger. ‘Don’t you believe for a moment her dress has anything to do with her being hot and cuddlesome. A wisewoman isn’t a warrioress. We’re generally easygoing; they are the opposite, and this girl’s nakedness is a deadly trap. She’d remove the manhood of any offender even quicker than I would.’

I used "elder" when I meant "wisewoman." Her nakedness wouldn't be a "trap" if she wasn't flaunting it.

I've known people who behaved that way. It happens. But this is how you have their wisewomen behave as a matter of course. I can see why people would think that's implying a lot.

 

[Garren Jacobsen]

But this is how you have their wisewomen behave as a matter of course. I can see why people would think that's implying a lot.

But is that implying the wisewoman as a person or wisewomen in general? And if it is general is it only for the younger group and the older group matures out if it?

I'm not defending the actions here, but it is a question that I think requires greater context. Because if this was a fad among the younger people it could just be attributed to young people being stupid, even if they are part of the wisewoman caste.

 

[Graylorne]

Devor: I can't and I'm not implying anything nasty.
I paint three peoples still recovering from a war. All three, Kell, Vanhaari and Unwaari have massive problems. I made the three peoples equal. No one is wiser or more successful than the other two. The Kell and Vanhaari are more or less cooped up in too small a territory, without purpose; the Unwaari have lost their beloved goddess and suffer from massive remorse. Yes, they are all reacting wrongly. They're refugees, seemingly whole but they're not. That's why the MC's decide their peoples need their old lands back and return to a normal life, what after all the point is of the book.


Brian: It is mostly the young wisewomen who walk around naked if they want to. They are all arrogant. Only Wemawee is acting worse, and for a plot reason. It's all in the book.

Though they as a caste are a hidebound lot, most wisewomen serve as well as they can. As advisers, for the leader is the queen. And the wisewomen carry the guilt of the transformation of the sexes that went so wrong. Many of the best wisewomen died through overtaxing, and the remainder are not so great.

 

[Devor]

Devor: I can't and I'm not implying anything nasty.

I mean, you describe her as "arrogant, snotty," the "opposite" of easy going, whose "nakedness is a deadly trap." And, "She’d remove the manhood of any offender....."

These are all the sorts of things certain people in America would say against black women. But okay. Some people behave all sorts of ways. Whatever. But you're now applying them to a whole caste of "wisewomen" who are the leaders of the tribe. So all these stereotypes are now an identifying characteristic of how many young black women behave in your work.

You're taking a very negative stereotype and affixing it as a defining trait for a whole caste young black girls.

I asked earlier in the thread. Couldn't your black people be a little more . . . normal?

 

[Graylorne]

They are only not normal when you compare them to your black girl next door (or perhaps not that, but at least in the US).
I didn't consider that girl for the book, because she is too obviously American.

Were I to look for a girl in a similar position in one of the great ancient African kingdoms, how would a priestess or princess there have reacted when some foreigner had tried to paw her?

And there was nothing primitive to those kingdoms. They were just different.

By now I am getting very unsure about what would seen as offensive, so I add the disclaimer that my arguments are meant respectful.

 

[Nimue]

I'm at a loss about how you can't grasp the problems with this. Your instinctive image of an ancient African priestess is an overwhelmingly negative one where she's arrogant, sexually aggressive, and a danger towards men?

Your intent is not coming through in your writing. Not at all. All of these excerpts are incredibly off-putting.

 

[Garren Jacobsen]

But isn't that just the problem Nimue, these are simply excerpts. I think if we were to take excerpts from many books, TV shows, and movies we would find problems with them. Like if you just focused on the parts of Huck Finn where the n-word was used and only looked at those excerpts and didn't put them within the context of the book. Or if you took a character that was at one point seemingly irredeemable and just a jerk and then failed to see the evolution of that character as the book went one.

I haven't read this book. I honestly don't plan on doing so until a bunch of other things get done (sorry Gray it's just a time issue). But, I think here a broader context is needed.

 

[Graylorne]

I am sorry, Nimue, but the only thing I grasp is that they upset you. But emotionally I don't see why. It must be one of those things that is part of your cultural history and not of ours.

As I don't want to offend people, I can only repeat that I better not write this diverse again.

 

[Graylorne]

No offense, Brian

Drat it, ran out of thanks again.

 

[Nimue]

You have had several people, including your requested reviewer, give you detailed rundowns about the issues with your writing. Your only response to this has been denying that anything is wrong with it and saying that you give up. Is this how you react when your writing is criticized in any other way? Or do you put thought and effort into understanding the criticism and improving your work? I sincerely hope it's the latter.

You went in well-intentioned but made some pretty serious story-building mistakes. That's not an unforgivable sin! Do some research and next time you could really nail the diverse, vibrant, message-filled story next time. But the first step is to listen and digest this criticism. Maybe set this aside for reflection when you're less upset.

 

[Graylorne]

I am listening, believe me, I am. And groping for understanding. But I am missing a lot of context in the explanations, too. And info on the web. That doesn't make it not easier.

I'll wait for Mindfire's comments on the book as a whole; that will make it a lot clearer.

Less upset... I'm having those depressions, so that could take awhile. But I'm trying.

Anyway, thanks, Nimue.

 

[Devor]

They are only not normal when you compare them to your black girl next door (or perhaps not that, but at least in the US).
I didn't consider that girl for the book, because she is too obviously American.

This, I think, should be a gut check moment for everyone.

What's the point of including diversity? Is it about including ever-more-exotic worldbuilding elements to make it interesting? Or is it about appealing to a diverse audience?

To me, if you're not considering the black girl next door, then you're not really shooting for diversity. And that's fine - I know that it's challenging and I wouldn't tell people what their goals should be - but I do get annoyed when people try to take credit for diversity but don't even try to write stories that a diverse audience can actually relate to.

But I will say this. Consider, for a moment, how much you personally relate to your MC. And then consider how much you relate to the black girl next door. If you relate to your MC more, you're not holding him to the same standard as everyone else in your story. Because really, he would behave so differently from all of us, too.

Were I to look for a girl in a similar position in one of the great ancient African kingdoms, how would a priestess or princess there have reacted when some foreigner had tried to paw her?

Yeah, it's a big challenge. The landscape and societies of Africa are very different and we have trouble getting inside their heads the same way. But there's no need to project aggressive, naked arrogance onto them. I mean, you had no trouble portraying Maud differently in the same scene. People are diverse within a single culture. I think you get that.

Truthfully, the problems in the scene aren't so much what you're showing, but what you're telling. We're told in dialogue that she was snotty and arrogant. Then it's confirmed as true by someone from their culture who didn't even meet her. Thus we as readers now know it's true for all of them. Even if we take for granted that those same words and demeanor - what was shown - are spot on accurate for what the character's would be, they could have been interpreted any number of ways.

And if Maud were really part of that culture, she wouldn't have reacted the way she did. She would've said, "She is not being snotty and arrogant. She is being a wisewoman, and she is due your respect." But she not only accepts the negative interpretation, she amplifies it.

So actions aside, you're still offering readers ample commentary on how their behavior should be accepted - and it's a very modern, very western, "this is arrogant, snotty behavior" kind of interpretation.

 

[Jabrosky]

You have had several people, including your requested reviewer, give you detailed rundowns about the issues with your writing. Your only response to this has been denying that anything is wrong with it and saying that you give up. Is this how you react when your writing is criticized in any other way?

I've said something like this before, but if Graylorne finds himself on the defensive here, it's probably because this specific genre of critique has an additional, much more sensitive dimension to it than most other forms of literary criticism. Let's face it, the main reason charges of racism, sexism, and so on are prone to provoking defensive reactions is because those ideologies have acquired villainous connotations---and rightly so for the ideologies themselves, but it does mean calling someone racist etc. will be easily interpreted as an attack on their moral character. Calling someone a bad writer may not be flattering, but it can't hold a candle to calling them a terrible human being in sheer negativity. And if they don't agree with your specific idea of what's right and wrong, of course they're not going to sympathize with your efforts to impose your own worldview onto him. You're like missionaries going off to tell the "savages" what's right and wrong, as if they hadn't developed their own concepts of morality.

Speaking of which, may I point out that you're all taking this Dutch guy to task because you interpreted his portrayal of certain black female characters as similar to traditional American stereotypes, as if Dutch people in the Netherlands (not to be confused with their colonial offshoots in South Africa) necessarily grew up with the same perception of black people that we Americans did? It's like you're projecting your peculiar American experience onto someone way on the other side of the Atlantic, never mind if his country doesn't share the same demographic and political history we Americans learned in our school.

Check your American privilege!

 

[Devor]

Check your American privilege!

I've never been to the Netherlands. But when I was in Germany, the people we were visiting talked about blacks, and asked if we were afraid of them, saying very clearly "All we know is what we see in American movies."

So, I'm not really sure what you're getting at.

 

[ascanius]

I went back and read the excerpt and well, I didn't see anything wrong with it. Yeah the girl is a complete ass but thats pretty much all I took out of it. However.

Truthfully, the problems in the scene aren't so much what you're showing, but what you're telling. We're told in dialogue that she was snotty and arrogant. Then it's confirmed as true by someone from their culture who didn't even meet her. Thus we as readers now know it's true for all of them. Even if we take for granted that those same words and demeanor - what was shown - are spot on accurate for what the character's would be, they could have been interpreted any number of ways.

And if Maud were really part of that culture, she wouldn't have reacted the way she did. She would've said, "She is not being snotty and arrogant. She is being a wisewoman, and she is due your respect." But she not only accepts the negative interpretation, she amplifies it.

So actions aside, you're still offering readers ample commentary on how their behavior should be accepted - and it's a very modern, very western, "this is arrogant, snotty behavior" kind of interpretation.

I think what devor said is important. I didn't know that Maud was part of the girls culture when I read the excerpt. I was under the impression that she had had dealings with the culture that left a bad impression but an outsider. I agree that her response would have been different because that kind of behavior would be considered normal thus the arogance would be of little notice. Unless Maud has spent an extensive period away then things start to become muddled as to cultural norms.