No dystopian novels please, we’re woke af
I didn’t realize the policing of Young Adult fiction was a thing until I read about the Kirkus fubar. It’s a thing.
The Black Witch, a debut young-adult fantasy novel by Laurie Forest, was still seven weeks from its May 1 publication date, but positive buzz was already building, with early reviews calling it “an intoxicating tale of rebellion and star-crossed romance,” “a massive page-turner that leaves readers longing for more,” and “an uncompromising condemnation of prejudice and injustice.”
The hype train was derailed in mid-March, however, by Shauna Sinyard, a bookstore employee and blogger who writes primarily about YA and had a different take: “The Black Witch is the most dangerous, offensive book I have ever read,” she wrote in a nearly 9,000-word review that blasted the novel as an end-to-end mess of unadulterated bigotry. “It was ultimately written for white people. It was written for the type of white person who considers themselves to be not-racist and thinks that they deserve recognition and praise for treating POC like they are actually human.”
The Black Witch centers on a girl named Elloren who has been raised in a stratified society where other races (including selkies, fae, wolfmen, etc.) are considered inferior at best and enemies at worst. But when she goes off to college, she begins to question her beliefs, an ideological transformation she’s still working on when she joins with the rebellion in the last of the novel’s 600 pages. (It’s the first of a series; one hopes that Elloren will be more woke in book two.)
It was this premise that led Sinyard to slam The Black Witch as “racist, ableist, homophobic, and … written with no marginalized people in mind,” in a review that consisted largely of pull quotes featuring the book’s racist characters saying or doing racist things. Here’s a representative excerpt, an offending sentence juxtaposed with Sinyard’s commentary:
“pg. 163. The Kelts are not a pure race like us. They’re more accepting of intermarriage, and because of this, they’re hopelessly mixed.”
Yes, you just read that with your own two eyes. This is one of the times my jaw dropped in horror and I had to walk away from this book.
Erm…I guess Sinyard is unfamiliar with how fiction works, which includes the convention that some characters may say things that the writer of the fiction doesn’t agree with, as for instance when there are Villains or Flawed People or Caricatures…like, say, Iago, or the Murdstones, or Mr Collins, or the Duke and the Dauphin. If you’re writing a fiction about a stratified society then you’re likely to have some characters saying the kind of thing one learns to say in a stratified society.
In a tweet that would be retweeted nearly 500 times, Sinyard asked people to spread the word about The Black Witch by sharing her review — a clarion call for YA Twitter, which regularly identifies and denounces books for being problematic (an all-purpose umbrella term for describing texts that engage improperly with race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, and other marginalizations). Led by a group of influential authors who pull no punches when it comes to calling out their colleagues’ work, and amplified by tens of thousands of teen and young-adult followers for whom online activism is second nature, the campaigns to keep offensive books off shelves are a regular feature in a community that’s as passionate about social justice as it is about reading. And while not every callout escalates into a full-scale dragging, in the case of The Black Witch — a book by a newcomer with a minimal presence online — the backlash was immediate and intense.
Based almost solely on Sinyard’s opinion, the novel became the object of sustained, aggressive opposition in the weeks leading up its release. Its publisher, Harlequin Teen, was bombarded with angry emails demanding they pull the book. The Black Witch’s Goodreads rating dropped to an abysmal 1.71 thanks to a mass coordinated campaign of one-star reviews, mostly from people who admitted to not having read it. Twitter threadsdamningthe novelmadethe rounds, while a Tumblr post instructing users to “be an ally” and signal boost the outrage racked up nearly 6,000 notes. Sinyard kept a running tally of her review’s circulation; “11,714 views on my review of THE BLACK WITCH and .@HarlequinTEEN and .@laurieannforest have not commented,” she tweeted. (That number eventually swelled to 20,000.)
Oh, man. That’s disgusting.
Positive buzz all but died off, as community members began confrontingThe Black Witch’s supporters, demanding to know why they insisted on reading a racist book. When Kirkus gave the novel a glowing starred review, dozens of commenters demanded a retraction; the uproar was so intense that Kirkus ran a follow-up essay by editor Vicky Smith on the difference between representation and endorsement: “The simple fact that a book contains repugnant ideas is not in itself, in my opinion, a reason to condemn it,” Smith wrote. “Literature has a long history as a place to confront our ugliness, and its role in provoking both thought and change in thought is a critical one.”
Ya think?
But a growing number of critics say the draggings, well-intended though they may be, are evidence of a growing dysfunction in the world of YA publishing. One author and former diversity advocate described why she no longer takes part: “I have never seen social interaction this fucked up,” she wrote in an email. “And I’ve been in prison.”
Many members of YA Book Twitter have become culture cops, monitoring their peers across multiple platforms for violations. The result is a jumble of dogpiling and dragging, subtweeting and screenshotting, vote-brigading and flagging wars, with accusations of white supremacy on one side and charges of thought-policing moral authoritarianism on the other.
Representatives of both factions say they’ve received threats or had to shut down their accounts owing to harassment, and all expressed fear of being targeted by influential community members — even when they were ostensibly on the same side.
I’m sure the result will be fewer but better books.
[I]t’s worth noting that my attempts to report this piece were met with intense pushback. Sinyard politely declined my request for an interview in what seemed like a routine exchange, but then announced on Twitter that our interaction had “scared” her, leading to backlash from community members who insisted that the as-yet-unwritten story would endanger her life. Rumors quickly spread that I had threatened or harassed Sinyard; several influential authors instructed their followers not to speak to me; and one librarian and member of the Newbery Award committee tweeted at Vulture nearly a dozen times accusing them of enabling “a washed-up YA author” engaged in “a personalized crusade” against the entire publishing community (disclosure: while freelance culture writing makes up the bulk of my work, I published a pair of young adult novels in 2012 and 2014.) With one exception, all my sources insisted on anonymity, citing fear of professional damage and abuse.
None of this comes as a surprise to the folks concerned by the current state of the discourse, who describe being harassed for dissenting from or even questioning the community’s dynamics. One prominent children’s-book agent told me, “None of us are willing to comment publicly for fear of being targeted and labeled racist or bigoted. But if children’s-book publishing is no longer allowed to feature an unlikable character, who grows as a person over the course of the story, then we’re going to have a pretty boring business.”
Boring and thought-killing.
“Boring and thought-killing.”
It’s a classic witch hunt, straight out of Salem Mass. circa 1692.
I can just imagine the sort of moralistic pablum these “activists” would approve.
I was thinking of this last night. I read a couple of short stories by Chuck Palahniuk. One of them featured a narrator, presumably black, who spoke in rap-like rhyme, with lots of malapropisms. He was pretty skeevy, as many of Palahniuk’s characters are. Had a white woman written a character like that she’d be crucified.
Presumably it would look something like this:
* **** ***** **, *** ****** ****: “**** ** *******, ** ***?” ** ***-***** *** ******, ***** ***, ***** ***. **** *** ****** ** *** *********, ****** **** *** (*** ***** ** **** ** *****). *** ** ****’* ** **** ****. “****!”, ** ***** ******* ***. ** ****** *** ** ** *** *** ***** – ** ******* **** **** **** – *** ****. “**** **”, ** *******, “*** ***’* ****** ** **** *** **** ** * **** ******.” *****-***. *** ** **** ** *** ******* *** ****, *** ****** *** ****** ** ***, *** ******* *** ** ****…
Citizen Foshaug, the Citizen’s Council regrets to inform you that your redaction was insufficiently rigourous.
Those parentheses are clearly counterrevolutionary. Report for re-education.
Harrison Bergeron, anyone?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
****! :(
The use of such language, even with the hidden letters, is still a dangerous activity. You’d be an asterisk it.
Citation needed. I don’t think these campaigns have good intentions at all.
(Bjarte: amused. Again. And it hasn’t been an amusing day. Appreciated.)
… more seriously, I hope those earlier reviews are on enough, and it’s decent…
I don’t really read much YA at all, lately. Took a shot at writing some (mumble) years ago, finished the first cut of the thing to a full and complete plot, then just ran outta spark to do the necessary sixty-two rewrites at which I mighta got comfortable enough with it to flog it out to publishers, somewhere around the third one… Used to try to read other YA stuff partly for that reason, advice being you should try to know a genre you’re trying to write in…
… don’t much, anymore. Creativity beaten outta me by I’m not going to get into what, of late, anyway…
… but here’s hoping Ms. Forest’s thing is decent because dammit, I’ll buy and read this. First-time author beaten up for failing to be _sufficiently_ woke, when apparently she maybe had something beautiful done and about to happen?
Jerks. No, this is by no means an endorsement either of the asshole brigade who’ll do whatever the culture police forbid, just to be annoying pissants quite the other way. But this pile-on sure does sound to me like excess city, here.
(Also: re:
“I have never seen social interaction this fucked up,” she wrote in an email. “And I’ve been in prison.”
… I lawled. With a certain simultaneous twitch.)
Lady Mondegreen@#2 When started seriously reading fictions in my twenties, most of my favorite writers actively pushed the boundaries of taste and what’s acceptable: Palahniuk, whom you mentioned, Dennis Cooper, Bret Easton Ellis… This was the nineties and there was, it seemed, a genuine market for gross-out lit. Most of those writers now I’d say are pretty juvenile, but I loved that it gave me a sense of anything is possible.
And yeah, it was a real boys’ club.
As for women being targeted by social media outrage more frequently and to harsher punishment, I think that women tend to gravitate toward communities that support social justice, and are expected to be the world’s caretakers, makes for a toxic climate. I don’t even comment on feminist blogs anymore. I’m too likely to go rogue.
“I have never seen social interaction this fucked up,” she wrote in an email. “And I’ve been in prison.”
Geez, that really sums it up.
It all seems like such a deliberate misreading to me.
The Handmaid’s Tale? It’s filled with patriarchal themes!
1984?! Is that the kind of world we want?
To Kill a Mockingbird?!?! Why do we need to read about these racists?
And The Black Witch, which I haven’t read (and most likely won’t) clearly sounds like an examination of racism and other bigotry in which a character breaks out of her suffocating society and learns that her bigotries are unjust and untrue. Isn’t that… positive?
Well quite. And there is on the other hand for instance Gone With the Wind which really is unselfconsciously racist. It’s usually not all that hard to tell the difference.
What or whom the fuck are Kelts? Why are these people getting upset on behalf of a fictional race? Will Jodie finally come out to his mother? Will Benson find his socks? Tune in to next weeks Soap for the answers.
Yeah—that’s the other thing! The book can, of course, easily be read as an allegory. And isn’t that often the case with fantasy and sci-fi? They give us a way to understand our world by letting us explore an imaginary one. But now we’re upset because selkies are being maligned by a character in a book?
Dishonesty and hypocrisy seem to be a lot of these people stock in trade, along with accusing anyone who disagrees with them of harassment. I already commented on a previous thread about the disquieting effects these sorts of attitudes have on fiction, but I really think it’s just another example of the breakdown of inquiry and conversation that’s taking place all over the world
One reason fantasy is a good medium for exploring these kind of themes is that the author does not have to walk on eggshells trying not to offend anyone. TV Tropes has a page on this called “Fantastic Racism”. There are often criticisms because fantasy races are often obviously based on real ones but the author gets to use their imagination more because the subject is less sensitive.
I just read the full article. One author says they were advised not to write a person of colour as a central character as it’s not worth the backlash. Bit of an own goal on the part of the activists there.
Myrhinne,
I may be wrong, but I don’t think that is an own goal. The logic is as follows: If a white person writes about a white person, their writing is bad because it lacks diversity; if they write about a non-white person, their writing is bad because it is appropriation. When Disney has thin characters, it is projecting an unrealistic body image; when Disney makes a movie with diverse body types, it is perpetuating the cliché of the obese Pacific islander (which I did not know existed as a cliché until I read such a criticism).
Kind of like how a woman who wants to have sex is a slut, and a woman who does not want to have sex just now is a tease or a prude. Only way to win is by not being a woman in the first place. As the example of the hypothetical white writer shows, people who think they are leftists can also play that game.
‘…advised not to write a person of colour as a central character as it’s not worth the backlash…’
Yes, each character must be written by a licensed representative of five overlapping ‘offended’ groups.
Bizarre that genuinely racist and fraudulently ‘ethnic’ garbage like ‘The Education of Little Tree’ or Demidenko’s bogus Ukrainianism are NOT ‘called out’ until the author’s actual ‘race’ is leaked.
Little Milos everywhere, ready to unleash every slimy social media stunt on cue. The book sounds like trash, but this kind of crap is why people get to use ‘PC’ as a whip against the left. This bullshit is suicidal distraction from any real progressivism.
You know, if it had stopped at the comment about “white savior” tropes, it might’ve been a reasonable review. It’s a reasonable concern in a racial strife allegory tale, and worthy of inclusion in a review (though it should be supported, of course, by analysis of the other characters–just having a privileged protagonist is not de facto the problem, it’s when they become the central figure of the larger struggle, rather than just one voice of many, or when they become lauded for basic decency.) I refuse to cede the word ‘problematic’ to these folks, because it’s actually a very good term for a work that is generally good but has one or more blind-spots that deserve mention. That’s part of the critic’s job.
Unfortunately, we live in the era of social media, wherein nuance and balance are shunned–if something isn’t amazingly spectaculariffic with a perfection cherry on top, then it must be vilified and destroyed as unclean.
And yes, part of the terror of social media is that it contains so much damned misogyny.
And in my play that had main characters that were non-white, I was advised to get an African-American co-author. (I had worked with an African American, but his name was not listed as a co-author, because he was not an author, did not write a single word, and only advised. He does not wish to be listed as a co-author, because he feels it is my work, not his). Even if I had listed him as a co-author, the complaint would then become “He doesn’t speak for all of us!”
Meanwhile, men of all shapes, sizes, and colors get to write women, and are not asked to get a female co-author. In fact, they are often asked “how do you write women so well?”, which is just a way of saying “men are default women are strange and different and it takes real effort to write something so weird and unnatural as women”. In addition, most of the men I know who get this question should have answered it “television and the movies”, since they aren’t writing real women, but the women presented to them electronically. They know their wife, daughters, sisters, mothers, and other female friends don’t behave that way, but, well, they must just be special, because women usually act this way. I know, I saw it on TV.
I think maybe “left cred” comes from advocating, in some way, however badly, for any one disadvantaged group, and people can still work out every other form of group animosity while safely under that umbrella. So if you’re (theoretically) advocating for people of color by any semi-plausible criticism of a white author, you can trash the white woman at issue as much as you like and still be “woke af”.
I would say it would be wonderful (for them) for the right to clue in on this, but (1) they already have, appropriating social justice terminology for use for their own bigotry as needed, and (2) they effectively already have people doing racist, misogynistic, ableist, etc. work for them while being utterly deniable as their problem, and (3) they even get to tut-tut about “PC gone mad” watching and eating popcorn.
It’d be nice if left cred was based not on trashing at least one privileged group but instead supporting every disadvantaged one and trashing none of them.
I like YA fiction*, particularly fantasy, and will now be putting this book, and any sequels, on order at my local bookshop. I am pissed off at people who pile on because they have been told that a book is ‘problematic’, and don’t understand that they should at least read the thing before attacking it. I don’t mean those who only read a few reviews before coming to a conclusion that it is a book that they probably wouldn’t enjoy and therefore don’t purchase. I mean those who actively and publicly trash something about which they know nothing, only what they’ve been told.
*So do several other members of my family, including the teen grandsons at whom the genre is aimed. The books will be well-read.