Cintra Wilson fills her role of (apparently) being snide and supercilious quite well in the original OUT article. I can’t quite make out her stance on the issue, but I do appreciate that she let Beecroft and Erastes mostly talk for themselves, despite how wrong the headline-writer originally was in calling Erastes and Beecroft "straight". Gawker does a great job of being snarky and impenetrable. I’ve read their response four times and canNOT make out which side of the issue the author is arguing from. In the comments to Brownworth's hatchet job (which, OMG, you fall into them and never get out), Paul Bens does a great job of following his self-imposed script AND of cuing the scripts other people follow as if it were somehow their contractual obligation. They, of course, oblige with his cues. The layers of irony are mind-boggling.
And I will now fulfill my role, follow my script, say the predictable thing that I always say because of my own particular obsession and the position from which I’m commenting. At least I know I’m doing it—that should count for something, right? But I’ll say it anyway, because, like the other commenters, I’m convinced that my piece needs to be said and recognized by everyone else, even if no one really listens because they’re caught in their own little circular script.
I'm discussing here the Brownworth article in particular, not only because it's the most desperately defensive but also because she's the new voice in the debate. As I said, Erastes, Beecroft, Bens, Gehayi, even Lambda in their original article (schizophrenic as it is) all fulfill their predetermined script/role. But Brownworth is a new voice, a voice backed by an extensive resume that she doesn't hesitate to wield rather indiscriminately. And it was her arguments that were the most egregiously incorrect, badly written, and offensive, which was disappointing precisely because of her credentials as a writer and a journalist.
In discussing her article, then, I could fulfill my role as a scholar pissed about inaccuracies in reporting and just plain bad writing:
Brownworth said to Elisa Rolle, who continues to communicate brilliantly in English considering it’s not her first language, that “that she might have less of a language problem if she were reading something less low-brow, but that was probably mean of me.” Yes, indeed it was. But really, Brownworth's fundamental assumption that these m/m ROMANCES are low-brow, are NOT art, are trash, pulp, worthless, worthy of derision, is, I argue, the real issue. I’m not even going to get into the commercial debate (would we be having this discussion if m/m weren’t successful?), because, to my mind, that’s not what you’re talking about here. Brownworth isn't upset that m/m romance is successful; she's upset that it’s low-brow. She's upset, specifically and in my opinion, that m/m romance is ROMANCE.
And really, THAT’S what pisses ME off more than anything else.
- It doesn’t help your case by accusing something you don’t like (m/m romance) of all the –isms (sexism, racism, homophobia). It just makes you sound like Chicken Little.
- Surely there is SOME difference between m/m romances with their prescribed HEAs and the lesbian pulp fiction of your youth which pathologized lesbianism? No? Really? Nothing?
- Do your (insert swearword) research:
- Not ALL m/m authors take male names. Not even when it first started, even though there were certainly more then. Most have rather sheepishly come out of the closet in the past few years.
- No, the majority of m/m romances are NOT historicals. People who don’t do their research think this because Erastes, Lee Rowan, and mainly, Running Press, have quite the little publicity machine going (and good for them, I say). But in the comments to Brownworth's article, Elisa Rolle provides some amazing statistics showing that historical are 10% of m/m romances published.
- I have NEVER read a rape in a m/m romance. This might (I said MIGHT—I don’t know!) be a feature of some slash writing, but I’d say (educated GUESS here, please advise) early slash and/or very specific niche slash. But NOT m/m romance.
- No, there is not a “male” man and a “feminine” man. Or at least, there isn’t in most m/m romances I’ve read. Maybe in yaoi. Maybe, again, in slash. Not in m/m romances. This presents its own problems, in that most of the heroes of m/m romances are constructed as very “straight looking, straight acting” men. In fact, when more stereotypically “feminine” gay men are portrayed (the wonderful Joey in the incomparable K.A. Mitchell’s Collision Course), I usually applaud it. As long as it’s well-done, it speaks to the many variations of the gay experience.
- No, most m/m authors are not straight women. Or at least, in my experience, most of the best m/m authors are in some way either gender queer or have some sort of alternate sexuality (and no, GLB just doesn’t cover all “alternate” sexuality, thank you very much). (NOT all m/m authors are not-straight, I hasten to add. I present Heidi Cullinan as Exhibit #1.)
- No, there is NOT an inherent disrespect of gay male relationships--although I'm sure Brownworth would argue "Who am I to make that determination?" But from my understanding of her article, the disrespect she's talking about is not how the best of m/m romance treats its subjects. And most of the egregious vocabulary has changed, at least in the best of the fiction. And, personally, I’ve read about men “fisting” their cocks (ie: jacking off) in stories I KNOW are written by men, both gay and straight.
- I might also say to Brownworth: Get over yourself. “Our relationships and sexuality are sacrosanct in their differentness from heterosexual relationships.” Really? REALLY? My same-sex relationships haven’t been, but maybe I’m not REALLY gay, considering I’m only bisexual? Or maybe it’s a generational thing. Coming out in 2009, versus coming out in the 1970s or 80s is, admittedly, a hugely different thing.
Brownworth said to Elisa Rolle, who continues to communicate brilliantly in English considering it’s not her first language, that “that she might have less of a language problem if she were reading something less low-brow, but that was probably mean of me.” Yes, indeed it was. But really, Brownworth's fundamental assumption that these m/m ROMANCES are low-brow, are NOT art, are trash, pulp, worthless, worthy of derision, is, I argue, the real issue. I’m not even going to get into the commercial debate (would we be having this discussion if m/m weren’t successful?), because, to my mind, that’s not what you’re talking about here. Brownworth isn't upset that m/m romance is successful; she's upset that it’s low-brow. She's upset, specifically and in my opinion, that m/m romance is ROMANCE.
And really, THAT’S what pisses ME off more than anything else.
Sarah: Thanks for a thoughtful and insightful post about that #@(*#@$&! "response" from Victoria Brownworth, who seems to be mainlining the Lambdi Lit mindset.
ReplyDeleteIndeed when she said that to me I wondered if basically the problem is that I was reading romance rather than that I was reading M/M romance. It reminded me of some prejudices I met when I was still reading het romance. But then I have always my ace to play: I have a bachelor degree in Economics, I'm a working woman with more or less 20 people under me, and I travel the world. I don't fit what Victoria, and other "cultured" women like her, thinks a romance reader should be. She said she was mean of her since she wrote that to me privately and I privately put her mind in the right way. But indeed I found upsetting that I have to "show" my bachelor degree to obtain respect.
ReplyDeleteElisa, I cannot believe she said that to you. My immediate reaction was I'd like to see her try to communicate in Italian as well as you do in English. But then I was just blown-away by her basic, fundamental assumption that the literature we're talking about it low-brow. I thought it was SUCH a telling thing to say.
ReplyDeleteAnd now I'm going to go fix the spelling of your name. Sorry!
damn, that was nicely said.
ReplyDeleteGo get 'em, Sarah. Well said. I was shocked by her contention that M/M almost always contains rape. Has she read any of them? I've read some with power issues that are explored during sex, but they're never rape.
ReplyDeleteTheresa
Lambda has just disappointed me of late. Between their awards change AND this reaction to the OUT article (which made some good points if making some majorly stressed assumptions), their credibility is dwindling in my book.
ReplyDeleteThe insult to Elisa especially made me mad. Why is romance low brow? Why is genre fiction in general considered low brow? Ugh. I know the LLF hasn't really been good with genre fiction, but that needs to change. It isn't the 70's lesbian pulp squick anymore. It's kind of actually good.
Great post, Sarah! Always interesting to hear your side of things.
"really, Brownworth's fundamental assumption that these m/m ROMANCES are low-brow, are NOT art, are trash, pulp, worthless, worthy of derision, is, I argue, the real issue."
ReplyDeleteIn the comment thread on Brownworth's post, Christie Gordon wrote that
"I’ve never read a hetero romance novel ever because I hate those TSTL heroines. I don’t identify with them and I never will."
Victoria Brownworth responded:
"that means she hasn’t read a romance novel in at least 30 years–I spent many years as a romance editor. We haven’t had heroines like that in decades"
I have no idea what kind of romances she edited, but unless she looked down on the romances she edited (which is possible, of course) maybe she thinks some romances are lowbrow and others are not?
I'd have to disagree with her about the absence of TSTL heroines in modern romances, though, because I've come across some in recent romances. In fact, Laurie Gold stated at AAR that the term "tstl, or too-stupid-to-live […] actually came from a very well-known author who wrote me about it in 1997 and asked to remain anonymous."
1997 is more than a decade ago, but it certainly isn't over 30 years ago.
Sarah, I didn't notice you wrongly spelled my name, I'm quite used to Eliza, Elise, and in Italian, you will not believe it, but many time I become Elena ;-)
ReplyDeleteBTW I wrote a comment on reply to Victoria's request to have some constructive argument, but the thread closed soon after so she didn't reply (not her fault). But since I love number I found some other "proofs" that many of her assumptions were without basis. I reposted the comment here, it's at the end of the post:
http://elisa-rolle.livejournal.com/1108364.html
after my ego burst ;-) I wrote the original post after I received the nice comment on how a LiveJournal was less important than the LLF website
I think Victoria should have just deleted her whole post on Lambda when she deleted her comments. I mean it was in the comments where it became obvious that her position was personal in nature and had nothing to do with anything like facts.
ReplyDeleteMust be hard to find the time to make that much shit up in order to attack those authors you see as your competition.
Sarah, that was an awesome tirade against the ignorant :0) It's not a romance, but Diana Gabaldon has a series about Lord John and he's homosexual. There are sex scenes. Is anyone squawking about that? Or is a heterosexual woman writing gay sex scenes okay, as long as it's not "romance"?
ReplyDeleteI've read all the links. Most of what I read is vituperation directed at the opposition. It neither an academic tone nor an informative content.
ReplyDeleteTeddyPid, I don't *think* she's deleted her comments. Or at least, all the ones I remember are still there. There are 2 pages, though, so maybe that's it? Although I do remember there being 105 or so comments and now there are 99, but with 6 trackbacks (do they count?).
ReplyDeleteKyra, the irony is, of course, that Lambda gave their Lammie award to a number of straight-identified women back before they changed their rules. So I imagine Lord John might have made that list.
Laura, I did notice what she said about romance in general. I'm fascinated with that aspect of her experience, to be honest, but my interpretation (as unacademic and uninformative as it might be) is that part of the issue here is the very nature of m/m ROMANCE. A lot of the debate, the very NATURE of the disinformation, is so very similar to what romance scholarship is still dealing with--old research, old assumptions, having read one or two older books and assuming to "know" the entirety of the genre, or, even, confusing something outside romance (slash) with recently-published romance.
I probably can't understand all the venom in some comments (and Victoria's post) since I have virtually no experience with fan-fiction or slash-fiction. I started reading M/M romance directly in ebook, and discovered there was free-fiction online only later, when I had plenty of ebooks to read and so no time to browse the communities. I had subscribed to some of them, but read maybe 1/2 stories to then get tired: I love to read a story from the beginning to the end, possibly in one session.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that some of the arguments Victoria stated (the rape, the unrealistic characters, the lack of reality (the HEAs?)) seemed to me the same old arguments I have always had to face in the last 20 years, when I started reading romance, and I arrived late to the party ;-)
Elisa
As a gay man writing gay fiction (both romance and erotica that never contained one single rape scene) for many years, my own public support for women (or anyone) writing m/m fiction has always been out there.
ReplyDeleteI've been in books that won lambda awards, but last year was my final submission to the LLF for the lambda awards. The gay male authors who have been gaining readership with digital m/m romance aren't being treated well either. I've been shunned by gay bookstore owners, one in particular was a judge in last year's lambda awards. And if openly gay authors show support to women writing m/m romance, they are treated even worse...to the point of being ignored and laughed at. This goes deep, and it's political.
A small elite group in the LLF wants to maintain control, and they are ignoring all the changes that have happened in the past ten years because they are terrified of losing the control. Did anyone see the list of winners from last year's lambda awards? Do people know that the award ceremony was so empty and that so many people didn't want to go they were sending e-mails to people like me begging them to fill the seats at the last minute? They even slashed the ticket prices at the last minute to get people to come. It was one huge snore!
This says something in itself. And I wouldn't have gone if they'd offered the seats for free.
Sorry I can't post this one with my name. There would be a dead author and a publisher with blood in his or her hands if I did. But I will speak openly when this year's lambda submission process begins about why I'm not submitting anything. It's time for the LLF to recognize change.
Dear Anonymous. Wow. Just...wow. Thank you so much for commenting. I think the fact you, a gay man, write romance with gay characters and are vilified as much as, if not more than female authors who write romance with gay characters, tells us all that this is about ROMANCE as well as all the other things it's about. I'm not going to try to elide the politics, etc. etc. from, the debate, because that's there too. But how much of this is adherence to a particular view of "gay literature" as being without happy endings and belief that romance in general is just "low-brow"?
ReplyDeleteAnd all the other stuff is just...to delicious not to delight in, even though in some ways it's so sad and so angry-making. Thanks. Schadenfreude, c'est moi. :)
"toO delicious" Sigh. Yes, I have advanced degrees in English. Shows you what it's worth, I guess.
ReplyDeleteTo certain extent, it's also about money, too. I know for a fact that the lambda judge/bookstore owner is barely holding on. He not only despises romance, but digital books in general because they are putting him out of business. He actually once went so far as to tell me he had no time for e-books or "that sort of thing." I took this to mean m/m romance, and I don't think I was wrong.
ReplyDeleteIn addtion...I've had lgbt editors defriend me on facebook for no apparent reason and I've had more than a few elitist authors make snide comments about m/m romance with happy endings.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about slash fiction is that, since anyone with a computer and the ability to write can participate, there's a great degree of variance in quality. Some of it is brilliant about gender and consciousness, and other bits of it are PWP (Porn Without Plot) fantasies.
ReplyDeleteWith Romance, people often conflate the worst of the genre (TSTL heroines, rapes) with the whole, ignoring the variation in quality. Here it seems like the same is being done to slash fiction and that, in addition, M/M Romance--a distinct, though related genre--is being tarred with the same brush.
It's a pity, imo. I say this as someone who prefers genderfucky het fanfic to slash. In my experience some of the most thoughtful het is written by people who do slash as well. Yes, there are teenage girls who just want to see HOTT MAN ON MAN ACTION. And mpreg! And yaoi. But there's so much more. And should their desire be pathologized? Really? The main reason I escaped the sexual shame of my youth is fandom and its cornucopia of sexual practices and awareness raising.
I do get why the Lambda awards might prefer to use their power to support gay men writing about gay men, though. That is their prerogative? I don't know the details, but perhaps an alternate award that's more open could be created? IDK
I think it's been a very long time since someone read m/m romance. Back in the days that rape was common in mainstream romance it was also common in m/m romance. But that was a long time ago indeed. Back when you had to mail order titles from City Lights because no one was going to order them for you.
ReplyDeleteI would have been more open-minded about Ms Brownworth's comments if she hadn't resorted to childish name calling--attacking Elisa's linguistic ability, and poking fun at my weight. Any credibility she may have garnered (zero) would have been wiped out at that, because someone who is incapable of arguing their case without resorting to neer neer neer tactics isn't anyone who deserves such attention.
ReplyDeleteThere are a few rapes that I can think of--although not any that I can recall are used for titillation purposes. There are a good many "captured man suffers sexual assaults, dubious consent which turns to love" They probably appear more in historical(?) - as I've read (and written) that and don't read many contemps. However, these mostly appear in books published earlier on, and I haven't read one like that for a while (other than Black Wade, the graphic novel this year).
Thank you for posting this, Sarah - there have been some good responses coming out of the whole debacle. I only wish it was the last time this was raised, but it will all blow up again in a few months' time.
Thank you!
ReplyDeleteWow--a publicity machine? And here I thought all we had was the time we spend on chats and blogging. Though there are the reviews on Erastes' Speak Its Name blog, which I do think was a brilliant way to generate awareness of the historical m/m niche, and probably one reason the genre seems larger than it really is. The only 'machine' I know of is our support for each other's work--no chore because this was not a matter of a few writers getting together to promote, it was a matter of a few writers becoming friends because we appreciate each other's writing. Believe it or not.
Another interesting blog on the subject is Eric Nguyen's "Who Speaks for Who?" (August 28)
http://youfightlikeannerice.blogspot.com/2010/08/who-speaks-for-who.html.
He took much of the Lambda party line as gospel in his original post, but asks some interesting questions--and invited me to guest-blog with my LJ response a few days later. I do think there are individuals within Lambda who are more concerned about quality of writing than what's in the writer's pants; I just wish they were running the show.
Re: research... I did a bit of my own, and Philadelphia's University of the Arts did not list Ms. Brownworth in its faculty directory, nor indeed anywhere on its site. I don't doubt that she has taught safe-sex S&M there, but my guess is that it was not on the curriculum, but in an "enrichment," ie, hobby course... going on that basis, I have taught (massage therapy) at The Ohio State University--but that doesn't give me academic chops. Between that discrepancy and the inaccuracies in her blogging, I have to wonder about the bona fides on the rest of her credentials.
There appears to be a deep grudge against romance in parts of the gay male writing 'community,' (which seems to consist largely of East Coast and LA writers).. so much so that in one Lambda blog, a young writer doing the 'write what you know' thing says,
“We need to kill the gay novel–if the gay novel means white gay men having sex and finding true love at the end.”
http://www.lambdaliterary.org/features/05/19/beyond-will-grace/
And Antonia Gonzales, chief editor of the Lambda website, posted the comment, "Amen."
So.. no HEA for you, white boys! No wonder Scott and Scott had to start Romentics when both the romance industry and the gay publishing world refused to consider their books.
I do not understand the mindset that wants to ban--censor, if you will--happy endings simply because a few writers don't believe they're possible. My gay beta's been with his partner nearly a quarter of a century; my wife and I had our tenth anniversary this year. The real thing may not be the stuff of high literary drama, but it beats the hell out of lonely angst and where is the harm in sharing hope?
Sorry if this is the 'predictable response,' but it's the only one I have.
Do you know that this debacle on the HEA in Gay Romance is way older than the last years? One of the most interesting guest blog I had was by Vincent Virga, that BTW meet his partner James McCourt when they were at Yale together in 1964 and they are still together. He wrote about his Gay Gothic Romance "Gaywyck": "Years later, while working in publishing, I read some modern romantic gothic novel--a form my mother loved and which I supplied her by the dozens--where the Jane-Eyre secret was not a crazy wife in the attic but--GASP!--a queer husband!! (There was actually a spate of these.) So, “Gaywyck” was born in 1977 as a way of proving that genres have no genders and romantic love is democratic realm not a het's kingdom. (The book was rejected by over 30 publishers and the editor who eventually bought it had to be convinced that gay people wanted romance: "If they want romance why hasn't anyone ever written a gay romance?" she asked me.) Like Yuichi, my Robert Gaylord is exquisitely gorgeous but has NO crisis when he falls in love with Donough Gaylord whose secrets in the attic generate enough grief for anybody. Their love is not the issue for Robert. He is only concerned with their happiness, not easily won but lasting forever after...as in all fairy tales."
ReplyDeleteand in the same post, later one, he remember how he obtained his first copy of Maurice, and that is a little story on its own, that makes me always smile: "Jimmy gave me this novel as a 7th anniversary gift, Memorial Day 1972. (I just showed the inscribed edition to him; he exclaimed: "How sweet! Now don't cry! Don't burst into tears!" Why do I write romantic novels?!) I love this book so much that its two central characters, Maurice Hall and the heavenly Alec Scudder are currently frequent guests at Gaywyck and are the greatest pals with Robert Gaylord in “Children of Paradise”. And why not? I love them! Forster thinks they "still roam the greenwood." He may have written one of favorite novels, “Howard's End”, but he can be very silly. They needed to "connect" with their brothers in this our life. So I've given them the community Forster never had while he was alive. "A happy ending was imperative," he writes in the novel's "Terminal Notes, even though Maurice says: "All the world's against us." Forster was right and helped inspire me to act accordingly with “Gaywyck”. (If I had a happy "ending" why couldn't they?) Meanwhile, my heart swells every time Alec says to Maurice: "And now we shan't be parted no more, and that's finished."" (http://elisa-rolle.livejournal.com/1042366.html)
While the anti-HEA sentiments are a familiar part of the litfic/genre divide, the point about the whiteness of protagonists seems like it should be taken separately from that and given some consideration. I've noticed that popular slash pairings are often amazingly white (esp. in fandoms where there's men of color in the canon: i.e. Shawn/Lassiter out-paces Shawn/Gus in Psych fandom), and of course het Romance has struggled with racial diversity for a long time, I wonder if it's an honest critique that M/M Romance has a tendency to focus on gay men who are white? And perhaps, while ignoring the nonsense about HEAs, that part could be looked at more closely.
ReplyDeleteWhite privilege is a separate issue from literary and genre fiction and aesthetic opinions about whether books should be relentlessly dour or have HEAs and such.
I have to disagree on this point Angel. Probably the first gay man writing romance to reach the wide public was E. Lynn Harris, and he definetely wrote about black gay men falling in love. So yes, there is a predominance of gay white men in M/M romance, but as often I notice reading books by multicultural authors, it's probably since it's even worst for them to come out, African American male culture has not exactly a positive and welcoming attitude.
ReplyDeleteIt's good to hear about E. Lynn Harris! I didn't know about his work. I'll have to look it up.
ReplyDeleteSo yes, there is a predominance of gay white men in M/M romance, but as often I notice reading books by multicultural authors, it's probably since it's even worst for them to come out, African American male culture has not exactly a positive and welcoming attitude.
I have two difficulties with what I think you're saying here.
First, I think it's difficult to generalize--since homophobia is a part of many cultures--in which cultures it's worse and in which it's better. Having recently done a paper that used Angela Y. Davis' Blues Legacies and Black Feminism: Gertrude "Ma" Rainey, Bessie Smith, and Billie Holiday, where she brings forth quite a bit of information about homosexual expression in parts of the historical African American community, it seems to me that talking about "African American male culture" as if it's all one thing across regions and classes is rather unsupportable.
And deeply problematic, because it's blaming the African American community rather than systemic racism (i.e. the economic, social, political, etc. ways that an African American or any person of color's way to becoming a writer is blocked in ways that it isn't for a white writer), which is.. damn, thinking that way has a bad, bad history all the way back to the Moynihan Report.
Second, another thing that confuses me is the idea that only gay men of color could/should write gay characters of color. I find that interesting, and also problematic. Do white female authors have no responsibility to diverse representation in their work, then? Is it possible for a white female author to write male in a way that it's impossible for her to write outside of her race?
That's ignoring the fact that maybe the small community of M/M Romance might want to consider the ways it could make itself more welcoming to writers of color.
((shrug))
I hold that it's very unfortunate to yoke together "anti-HEA" aesthetics with critiques of white privilege within the sub-genre and act like the whole thing comes from a bad place, instead of taking the positive criticism and considering it.
I realize that authors and readers of M/M Romance are in an unfortunate place of upheavel and upset because of all the debate that has gone on, but that's no excuse to throw around one's white privilege be openly dismissive of people of color in public the way Lee Rowan was.
Hello, all.
ReplyDeleteLet me introduce myself. I wrote Lovers' Knot, the fourth novel in Running Press's series, which has flown under the radar in almost all of these conversations(presumably because of my being demonstrably male and quite homosexual).
First, Sarah, excellent post. I was going to respond over at LL on the original, but the comment chain became so incredibly vituperative that I simply ducked and covered, hoping to avoid the shrapnel.
I might also say to Brownworth: Get over yourself. “Our relationships and sexuality are sacrosanct in their differentness from heterosexual relationships.” Really? REALLY?
THANK YOU.
In terms of the entire "women writing M/M" brouhaha, I keep trying to say something profound yet witty, but all I seem to come up with is the hopelessly naive "Why in the world is there such a fuss about this? It's all rather 'The Emperor Has No Clothes,' isn't it?" I simply don't understand it. Books are either well written or badly written. That is all (thank you, Mr. Wilde).
In terms of detesting HEA, I am baffled. I like HEA. I love it. In his comments on Maurice, Forster said that a happy ending was necessary, and this was in 1913. I totally agreed with him, and have frequently said "All gayboys in my stories will have happy endings," (which, of course, I promptly violated for one character in Lovers' Knot).
A bit more delicately, I'd like to respond to Angel, not in terms of African-American society - about which I can say little - but in terms of writing a person of color, or of a widely different cultural background, as a main character. It is something I don't believe I could undertake.
First, I'd want to avoid exactly the kind of reaction that has been erupting over women writing M/M. This is purely self defense.
Second, and more importantly, I don't think I could get it right. As an upper middle class white Protestant male, I simply don't understand the experience of being African American, Japanese American, Latino, or any other than what I am: Anglo-German American (with some Norwegian thrown in for good measure). And I don't know that any amount of research could give me that understanding.
Ten years ago I read Just Above My Head by James Baldwin, and when I finished, I sat down with my best friend, who is African-American, and said "I've just read this, and I want to talk about it, and please forgive at the outset anything ignorant or stupid I say, because I don't understand, and I really want to know...". And we had a long conversation. The thing that had astonished me most was reading what an African-American man wrote about his perception of Anglo-Americans. It was a window into something about which I had had no idea, and which left me fairly shaken, and made me far more conscious about how widely different the human experience can be, and yet how completely understandable, given we are all human.
But to write it myself? No, I don't think so. At best I could perhaps write a character of a different culture as perceived by my character, something I'm planning on in a book I'm beginning to research, one about an Englishman who travels to Ireland in the late 19th Century. I only hope I get it close.
Some might say I should aim that same commentary at women -- het, bi, or lesbian -- who write M/M fiction. I cannot agree, though I cannot say why. One of the most profoundly moving reading experiences of my life was when I first read The Charioteer, written, of course, by a woman. I've read any number of books by women in which the male characters are dead spot on accurate, and the other way around. And perhaps there are authors who can cross cultural divides as cleanly and accurately as these authors did. I just don't believe that I am one such author.
Yet. =-)
Again, Sarah, thank you!
Donald, I hear what you're saying. I'm not trying to position myself as an expert (far from it; the work of trying to check my own white privilege is ongoing and not without failures) or tell you what to do. I struggle with similar problems in my own writing. The only reason I said anything at all is that...
ReplyDeletea) white privilege means that a disproportionate number of writers are white and white characters are the norm
b) within that position of (relative!) privilege, LR decided to be dismissive of a statement that included an implicit critique of white privilege in M/M Romance because it came paired with anti-HEA sentiment, instead of acknowledging that there's an actual separate problem
c) It's not possible to completely get beyond one's white privilege, but it's possible to do research on the lives of other people just the same as it's possible to read about oh, I don't know, naval history! There are a lot of places where you can read people of color's academic/activist work on their many, varied experiences and perspectives. I'm not saying you have to start having diverse casts, but that if that's a direction you want to go in there are many good resources. I'm willing to provide links/titles! :)
d) The question of how M/M Romance (and its tributaries, like fandom) could be more welcoming to writers of color remains. And, like most justice questions, it has no easy answer. But considering it and trying is an important first step to being more welcoming.
A more welcoming space is one wherein one's concerns, and the oppression one lives with, is given respect and time and energy, rather than off-handedly dismissed.
A space where the opinions of people of color are dismissed is one that is sending a clear signal "Not Welcome" to a lot of people.
The question of whether or not M/M Romance written by women is appropriating of gay male culture is... unanswerable, frankly. Or, rather, there are a lot of answers that people feel very strongly are valid for good reasons. That can't be resolved, but the small world of M/M Romance can be a better space in other ways.
I'm not saying LR was being deliberately exclusive, or that one bad comment is the extent of the problem, merely that it appears--from the way white characters and writers dominate the sub-genre, and the way people perhaps feel comfortable talking--that a raise in awareness could be really positive.
I have friends who write slash and want to get into original fiction. Some of them are white, some are women of color. It's beneficial to everyone that M/M Romance be a genre where everyone feels welcome.
Angel, again sorry if maybe my word mislead you. Sincerely I really didn't think on the whole question "only gay man of color can write of gay man of color". I gave you the example of E. Lynn Harris (that was a black gay man indeed and that unfortunately died at 54 years old 2 years ago) since, in regards of Multicultural Gay Romance he is probably first in line; I recently read Visible Lives, a tribute three other authors did for E. Lynn Harris, and again I found again, plainly explained, how it's difficult for them to come out. Truth, it's the same diffucult in the coming out story I read in other culture experience, white, asian, ... but I noticed something that maybe I didn't notice so much in other stories:
ReplyDeletea) when the gay man is an African American, there is a contraposition on being gay and being a Macho man (for macho I want to include all the Y chromosome characteristics). It's like if he admits he is gay he is expected to loose that Y chromosome.
b) similarly (but I have less experience in that genre), with Asian culture the problem instead seems more on traditions, on not respecting what family is expecting from you.
but maybe I'm totally wrong, as I said it's more or less a perception, I didn't really do any research on that.
Oh, BTW I read a nice novel on Multicultural lovers, one white and one black: the author is a white man, K.M. Soehnlein and the story is set in the late '70 beginning of the '80. I think Soehnlein did a good job in rendering the gay black man character. It's not really a romance, the love story is not center piece, but it was a good book.
ReplyDeleteJust leaving a thanks for the article, and the discussions in the comments (which I'm still reading).
ReplyDeleteSarah, I feel your description of 'roles' is very apt. Whenever this topic is raised, there's a leap in some camps (note, I say *some*) into aggression, diversion - and NOT just on the m/m authors' side - and deliberate hijacking. I fail to see how this moves anything forward on either side - and I'm sad to think that maybe it's in some people's interest to keep it like that. I haven't thought all of that through yet.
I also appreciated you opening the anti-romance attitude that comes to light, for discussion. As far as I can see, this whole topic of the rise of m/m romance fiction has many strands to it, several of which definitely deserve a raising of awareness - but the rabid diversionary tactics cut them all off short each time, before they get a fair hearing.
Thanks for a very interesting article, Sarah! It hadn't occurred to me that some literary groups might regard romance per se as a very bad thing. It probably should have, given what I've heard about the treatment of the gay pulp writers back in the sixties. For my part I totally agree with Donald that the work is the thing. Books should be judged on their own merits and not on who wrote them.
ReplyDeleteLike Lee, I would question the fact that we have a publicity machine! None of us worked to get into Out magazine, for example, Out magazine just emailed me out of the blue one day and said "how do you fancy doing an interview?" I believe the fact that there has been more publicity for the Running Press books than some others is all down to the fact that Running Press is a big mainstream publisher, and therefore our books have come to the attention of people who largely ignore the small press and ebook world.
It also hadn't occurred to me that the male authors in the genre were also coming under attack. I noticed that they had been conveniently disappeared from the discussion, but I didn't realize it was as bad as Anon points out. My God! I wish I knew what to do about that, but I will stop naming the ones I know in discussions in future. I don't want to cause anyone trouble.
Angel, I'm not trying to be "dismissive" of the race issue, but I do see it as separate from the disdain towards romance. I was dismissive of the notion that it's OK to destroy an entire genre (as if anyone could) because one race is predominant. (That in itself is also a racial comment, is it not? Who is stopping gay men of color from writing romances? Not I.)
ReplyDeleteWriters are going to write about things that inspire our imaginations; our imaginations are fueled by our own experience. We're already up to our eyebrows in "write what you know" and "you can't possibly know how we feel." I think that is less true for male vs female than it is from the standpoint of race. Sexuality runs a wide gamut from very gentle, 'yin' men to very 'yang' women, and in a sense transgender folks walk in both worlds (I wish European culture had been able to see that as a spiritual asset, the way some First Nations tribes did). I have done a huge amount of research on native North American people. I'm still not ready to put it into a book.
As Don said, there is a major social divide between whites and people of color that most of us raised white aren't even aware of. The only black people I could readily identify, as a child, were Lt. Uhura of Star Trek, Alexander Scott of I Spy, and Martin Luther King... and a few well-known actors and singers. I didn't see any difference between us and the Mexican family next door except that they got homemade tortillas and we got homemade bread. Moving to a big city after high school was quite a shock--some people hated and feared me because I was white. It was bizarre, and nothing I could say would break through that.
Most of the friends I have who are of other races are people I met through Star Trek fandom, which, as corny as it got, at least gave a more hopeful view of the world. Aikido and tai chi brought me to an awareness of Asian culture--though that's another ocean that I've just put my toes in. Some folks I've met on the internet were friends before I knew or thought about what color they are. Sue me--it really is not something I think about.
The one thing I know about this whole issue is that there is so much I do not know that I could spend the rest of my life researching instead of writing. Knowing that one probably cannot get a thing right is a huge disincentive to even make the attempt, since no matter how well one writes, there will be plenty of critics to say why it's wrong.
Since I've had several gay men tell me that I did get things right (hey, the brain center that registers orgasm is pretty much the same in male and female--we are more alike than different) I know that what I write rings true for at least some of my readers. That's really all I hope for. I do have a couple of ideas for stories set in other cultures, but they aren’t ready yet. A piece of fiction isn’t an item off a menu; I can’t force that process. But I can say that people telling me what I should write make it less likely that I will. I’m more likely to say “Show me how. Write it yourself.”
Have you?
A postscript--and thanks, Clare, I agree; I hope this discussion doesn't get hijacked onto a different issue.
ReplyDeleteI would love to see more stories like "Normal Miguel," Erik Orrantia's romance set in rural Mexico. (Disclosure: Erik’s a fellow Cheyenne author, but this example is too perfect to omit.) I didn't think of it at first because it seems to fit the bill so well: debut novel by a gay man who lives in Mexico, writing a gay romance about two Mexican men, from the completely informed point of view of a resident who is the "proper" gender and orientation. Obviously a winner, right? Our publisher had been promised a review for NM by a well-known gay reviewer.
He sent it; the book vanished, with no response to his followup. If someone in the Lambda establishment promises to review a book by a Latino writer, then ignores it because it's a romance with the dread HAPPY ENDING, the line of discrimination is apparent.
Elisa, have you ever read Joseph Hansen's David Brandstetter novels? A hard-boiled detective series in the Raymond Chandler vein, but with the main character being homosexual, and who, later in the series, has an African American partner. Given that the first one was published in 1970, I'd say groundbreaking is an accurate term.
ReplyDeleteIf I hear "write what you know" one more time offered as an argument against women writing m/m fiction, I shall scream. Oh, wait, I already have. Robert Duncan said, "If I write what you know, I bore you; if I write what I know, I bore myself, therefore I write what I don't know." I believe he was a gay poet. ;-)
Several other things bothered me about Brownworth's article and comments.
First, that a lesbian who writes gay male porn under a pseudonym was calling women out for writing gay male romance under pseudonyms was, to say the least, odd. My initial reaction, before I knew about that piece of peculiarity, though, was a knee jerk "Woman, don't you speak for me and mine about being objectified." My knee jerked at the fact she was a lesbian, not only at what she'd said. Had a gay man written it, I'd have been more "Girlfriend, chill." I was fairly mortified; this is the first time I've stated that reaction in a public forum. I wasn't ashamed, per se, but very conscious of how politically volatile that statement might be. Now, apparently, I am prepared to have my reputation as open-minded and inclusive (assuming I have such a reputation) go down in flames.
Second, her contention that "gay men don't rape." Really? Seriously? Tell that to three of my friends who've been raped. And those are the ones who've told me about it.
She does modify that statement in her comment that it "breaks the relationship," however, and so I assume she's referring to the trope of "He's raped me, I now love him, let's get on to the HEA", which seems to have faded from the genre both in het and homo books.
I guess my point is, if you're going to launch on an entire genre, and generalize wildly about the genre and its subjects, get your facts straight (so to speak). And that, as much as the vituperative nature of the comments, bothered the bejebus out of me. So your column, Sarah, simply fleshed out and stated more thoroughly what I'd felt and suspected. Thanks.
On roles and camps and scripts, well, that hasn't necessarily kept me mum, but has made me wary. I've assumed that, should I comment on the side of women writing M/M, I'll be slammed with the "Ah, one of Erastes and Lee Rowan's toadies!" comment -- understandable (from their POV) because we're friends and co-authors in the series, but annoying because such a comment immediately negates any argument or opinion I might hold regardless of its validity. I'm shocked -- SHOCKED I SAY -- at just how polarized this issue is, particularly when I don't consider it much of an issue at all, personally.
Meh.
Footnote: Sarah, I'm crushed. CRUSHED. =-D I cannot say why, for fear of spoilers.
@Donald
ReplyDeleteNo, I didn't read that one. Even if I read thousands of books, it seems that there are always new authors (new for me) to read. I gave up to the idea of reading them all, and now, more or less, I follow my mood, I'm no more trying to read all the books of all the authors I like, I'm more in the phase pick here pick there :-)
and unfortunately, even if I well know that there are gay male authors who disagree with Victoria Brownworth's article, I also know that she indeed is speaking the mind of some of them.
Lee,
ReplyDeleteThanks for taking the time to reply. I appreciate hearing where you're coming from.
As I said to Donald above, my point wasn't to try to push anyone to write along particular lines; my concerns were more in the area of what kind of space writers (and readers!) of color might find in M/M Romance.
Thanks again,
Angel
I think you were, but never mind that... As for the "kind of space?" Ask Stevie Woods how her interracial couple in "Cane" and "Conflict" were received. Ask Erik Orrantia. When "Miguel" hit Cheyenne's #1 bestseller spot we were all congratulating him. I think they saw pretty much the same response as any other writers do--congratulations on a new book, comments on the excerpts posted, a few questions on the research Stevie did to establish the setting and characterization. If anything, I think her books received a little more attention than average because she was writing something so very difficult: an interracial couple in which one was a slave.
ReplyDeleteI think that what's needed more than space is an audience and a market, and that is something that must be created by readers (letting publishers know there's a demand) and publishers (giving writers a point of publication and distribution.)
Other writers cannot do this. We can encourage; we can recommend one another's books on our blogs and the ubiquitous promo lists. That space already exists. Our Yahoo list, Speak Its Name, welcomes promotion of all GLBT historical fiction. The color of a writer or a character is irrelevant. We don't deal with contemporary m/m, but many promo and review lists do, and I've seen excerpts and reviews featuring characters of color on just about all of them.
I'm dead serious when I say that if you perceive a need for an m/m PoC "space"--to encourage writers to try writing characters of color, the risk, to foster accuracy, to give moral support while they're doing the hard work of writing and finding a publisher, even to pair new writers with beta-readers willing to give constructive edits--you're probably right, and you must have an idea of what you think that space ought to be.
Why not create it yourself? Really--why not?
It is extremely easy to set up a yahoo group. If this is the issue that sets you on fire, why not feed the fire yourself? My favorite teacher always said that when a person says "Somebody ought to," the place to look for "somebody" is in the mirror.
I'm not being sarcastic when I say 'good luck.' Sooner or later someone will make this happen, and you might be that person.
Thanks, guys! You've been doing a sterling job without me!
ReplyDelete@Donald, I don't mean to crush you. ::confused:: I guess I need the spoiler myself. And I loved your point about how your associations shouldn't negate (or bolster, for that matter) your own points. Fascinating.
I think we have different definitions of "space." I'd also like to point out that M/M Romance is not my chosen profession the way it is yours. My life's work is academia, and you can bet I work my butt off in my chosen profession to check my privilege and do work that supports the values of social justice.
ReplyDelete...I am pleased to hear that there have been successes in diversity within the sub-genre which I was unaware of. Thank you for mentioning that.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous--
ReplyDeletethe lambda judge/bookstore owner is barely holding on. He not only despises romance, but digital books in general because they are putting him out of business
Whoa, so the awards are no longer about writing at all, but about getting even with changes in the publishing system? That's one judge who ought to recuse himself.
But change that threatens a person's livelihood is serious. I have to wonder why he hasn't investigated the possibility of opening an online store as well-- diversify into distributing ebooks. I always want my 'keepers' in hardcopy, but ebooks are not going to go away and they're great for traveling.
As for your anonymity... there's something badly wrong in a community when people who hold different views are forced to hide. Closets within closets... It sounds like Lambda's cannibalizing itself. And Brownwell's little jeerleader may have scoffed at my charge of envy, but I can't believe there isn't some truth to it.
What strikes me as a little silly is... there's nothing stopping gay writers from sending stories to the ebook publishers; they'd have the advantage that het female readers tend to flock to men--even gay men--far more readily than to women. But they'd have to write happy endings for the romance genre. Why is a painful conclusion "literature" and a happy ending "pulp?"
Angel--
ReplyDeleteI waited a few days before writing this because I didn't want to snap off an ire-based reply to your attitude of dismissive superiority. But I feel impelled to respond to your "I'd also like to point out that M/M Romance is not my chosen profession the way it is yours. My life's work is academia..."
Sigh.
We probably do have different definitions of 'space.' You never gave yours, did you? I avoid the term because it's vague and tends to mean whatever the speaker wants it to.
You never did define your chosen profession, either. "Academia" is pretty vague. You could be a social science prof or a grad teaching assistant in geology. I thought from your assumption of authority on writing that you were a writer yourself. (I've read about Bessie Smith's sexuality, too, one needn't be an academic to keep up on such things.)
As for your other assumptions.. I'd venture to say that there's not a single writer I know whose "chosen profession" or "life work" is m/m romance. Most of us have done many other things that you know nothing about. I spent a quarter-century as an LMT and hypnotherapist before moving to Canada with my wife in search of--social justice, isn't that interesting?--and my credentials aren't valid here. My life work was healing, Angel. And I try to continue that with my stories. What is in my books, or any of our books, is only a small part of who we are, and your defining us as units of 'white privilege' is every bit as depersonalizing as anything else done on the basis of color.
Talking down to us because You are an Academic and we are mere romance writers doesn't make anyone want to follow your direction. It only creates resistance.
BTW, I'm married to an academic who holds advanced degrees in two of the hardest sciences out there, and I've never seen her share knowledge by talking down to other people. Look at Sarah F's blog right here if you need an example of an academic presenting her case in accessible language.
"... you can bet I work my butt off in my chosen profession to check my privilege and do work that supports the values of social justice..."
That's great. Is part of that work telling people you don't know that they must do work you aren't willing to do? I followed your link and found a Livejournal post dealing with Dr. Who. Now, if you're into fanfic, you probably remember "racefail" and all the wrangling that came out of it. A lot of anger got vented, but I'm not sure how much else was accomplished because I stopped reading when two people I know got flamed--people of good will who were honestly asking for suggestions and got nothing but abuse. This issue is a lot more complicated than you suggest.
I think creating a support blog for writers who want to diversify the casts of their books would be a worthy goal. If you work in academia there must surely be a pool of local talent you might nurture. You wouldn't even have to sully your reputation by making it specific to the romance genre. You might make it fannish, invite other moderators (maybe some actual people of color?) and take an active part in bringing diversity into fiction. If you got good teammates it would not be as much work as it sounds. And, again--this 'space' is your idea, why not roll up your sleeves and be midwife?
Yes. I am suggesting you make the change you want to see and lead by example. Talk is easy. Change is hard. Don't tell people to do a job you're not willing to do yourself. If you want to inspire others, if you want credibility--the best way to do it is to walk your talk.
Angel--
ReplyDeleteI waited a few days before writing this because I didn't want to snap off an ire-based reply to your attitude of dismissive superiority. But I feel impelled to respond to your "I'd also like to point out that M/M Romance is not my chosen profession the way it is yours. My life's work is academia..."
Sigh.
We probably do have different definitions of 'space.' You never gave yours, did you? I avoid the term because it's vague and tends to mean whatever the speaker wants it to.
You never did define your chosen profession, either. "Academia" is pretty vague. You could be a social science prof or a grad teaching assistant in geology. I thought from your assumption of authority on writing that you were a writer yourself. (I've read about Bessie Smith's sexuality, too, one needn't be an academic to keep up on such things.)
As for your other assumptions.. I'd venture to say that there's not a single writer I know whose "chosen profession" or "life work" is m/m romance. Most of us have done many other things that you know nothing about. I spent a quarter-century as an LMT and hypnotherapist before moving to Canada with my wife in search of--social justice, isn't that interesting?--and my credentials aren't valid here. My life work was healing, Angel. And I try to continue that with my stories. What is in my books, or any of our books, is only a small part of who we are, and your defining us as units of 'white privilege' is every bit as depersonalizing as anything else done on the basis of color.
Talking down to us because You are an Academic and we are mere romance writers doesn't make anyone want to follow your direction. It only creates resistance.
BTW, I'm married to an academic who holds advanced degrees in two of the hardest sciences out there, and I've never seen her share knowledge by talking down to other people. Look at Sarah F's blog right here if you need an example of an academic presenting her case in accessible language.
"... you can bet I work my butt off in my chosen profession to check my privilege and do work that supports the values of social justice..."
That's great. Is part of that work telling people you don't know that they must do work you aren't willing to do? I followed your link and found a Livejournal post dealing with Dr. Who. Now, if you're into fanfic, you probably remember "racefail" and all the wrangling that came out of it. A lot of anger got vented, but I'm not sure how much else was accomplished because I stopped reading when two people I know got flamed--people of good will who were honestly asking for suggestions and got nothing but abuse. This issue is a lot more complicated than you suggest.
I think creating a support blog for writers who want to diversify the casts of their books would be a worthy goal. If you work in academia there must surely be a pool of local talent you might nurture. You wouldn't even have to sully your reputation by making it specific to the romance genre. You might make it fannish, invite other moderators (maybe some actual people of color?) and take an active part in bringing diversity into fiction. If you got good teammates it would not be as much work as it sounds. And, again--this 'space' is your idea, why not roll up your sleeves and be midwife?
Yes. I am suggesting you make the change you want to see and lead by example. Talk is easy. Change is hard. Don't tell people to do a job you're not willing to do yourself. If you want to inspire others, if you want credibility--the best way to do it is to walk your talk.