![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
As some of you may already be aware (I heard about it from Steven Brust's blog), an editor from an SF magazine wrote a rejection letter including extremely racist language, and it was, of course, posted online--the usual chaos ensued. I don't really want to talk about that here (there are already excellent discussions going on on the sites to which Brust links, which I recommend reading), but reading the commentary on many of the sites made me start thinking about race in the SFF world. I made the mistake once of calling a writer a "token" representative of their race and gender inside the SFF world, meaning only that they were the stand-alone at the time, and had it explained to me very clearly why using the word "token" was offensive. (It implies that they're only included because of the race/gender combination, not on their own merit.) It was an embarrassing experience, but one that I hope has made me have a better understanding of how some casual language can end up being hurtful.
So, here's the thought I had this morning. I don't read writers based on their race--certainly not intentionally. I read fiction that I like because it's in a genre that appeals to me or has a concept or story-selling-point that makes me want to pick it up. But I also like fiction that comes from perspectives other than my own white, female, straight, middle-class, Christian, Midwestern perspective. I think a lot of elements can shape the perspective with which you approach your fiction, and race, gender, sexual orientation, class, religion, and geography are certainly among them. (Though region-ism is far less inflammatory than prejudices, there are *definitely* ideas about people based on where they grew up, and while in the U.S. itself the South v. the North is probably still the most obvious one I notice, I do hear expectations about Midwesterners that baffle me on occasion. Expanded internationally, it gets further skewed, both against Americans and from an American perspective of those abroad.)
What I'd really love (for those willing to respond here) are recommendations of SFF titles that you feel are excellent examples of SFF that comes from a perspective really different from the one I've listed above. I'd also love to have recommendations of SFF writers who are using their "non-traditional" in SFF (still reputed to be the domain of white men in many circles) perspectives to push the genre in new directions. Alternately, if you have recommendations for SFF writers, regardless of their own background, who do a model job presenting SFF from a "non-traditional" perspective, I'd love to hear about those, too.
Not that I need to add a bunch more books to my TBR pile--but I'd love to hear more about what's out there that I'm missing.
So, here's the thought I had this morning. I don't read writers based on their race--certainly not intentionally. I read fiction that I like because it's in a genre that appeals to me or has a concept or story-selling-point that makes me want to pick it up. But I also like fiction that comes from perspectives other than my own white, female, straight, middle-class, Christian, Midwestern perspective. I think a lot of elements can shape the perspective with which you approach your fiction, and race, gender, sexual orientation, class, religion, and geography are certainly among them. (Though region-ism is far less inflammatory than prejudices, there are *definitely* ideas about people based on where they grew up, and while in the U.S. itself the South v. the North is probably still the most obvious one I notice, I do hear expectations about Midwesterners that baffle me on occasion. Expanded internationally, it gets further skewed, both against Americans and from an American perspective of those abroad.)
What I'd really love (for those willing to respond here) are recommendations of SFF titles that you feel are excellent examples of SFF that comes from a perspective really different from the one I've listed above. I'd also love to have recommendations of SFF writers who are using their "non-traditional" in SFF (still reputed to be the domain of white men in many circles) perspectives to push the genre in new directions. Alternately, if you have recommendations for SFF writers, regardless of their own background, who do a model job presenting SFF from a "non-traditional" perspective, I'd love to hear about those, too.
Not that I need to add a bunch more books to my TBR pile--but I'd love to hear more about what's out there that I'm missing.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-10 02:22 pm (UTC)Sadly, I have no clue about most of the writers. No clue what they look like or even who they are, I just care if I like what they write or not. Well, I have my other byline which differs from your "white, female, straight, middle-class, Christian, Midwestern" on 3 points. :P
no subject
Date: 2008-07-10 03:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-10 06:13 pm (UTC)I'm also a big fan of Orson Scott Card, who's kind of less diverse in that he's a straight, white, man, but is relevant since the way he's different, being Mormon, comes up repeatedly in his fiction in all sorts of weird ways (more or less depending on the book -- like a whole lot in "Folk of the Fringe," which is all about Mormons, and, a bit more subtly, a bunch in his Homecoming series, which is about, kind of, prophet space colonists).
no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 01:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-10 07:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-12 03:07 pm (UTC)