kate_nepveu: sleeping cat carved in brown wood (Default)
Kate ([personal profile] kate_nepveu) wrote2011-05-31 11:58 pm
Entry tags:

WisCon: How To Describe Nonwhite Characters Sans Fail

This panel took place late Saturday afternoon, after my "Vigorous Debate or Harassment?" panel, but I am posting it out of order because I will be referring to it in the set of panel reports that "Vigorous Debate" belongs to.


How do we get beyond "Her skin was the color of a delicious Coca-Cola?" What metaphors, similes, techniques, and descriptors are less problematic when describing nonwhite characters' physical bodies? (Starter link: http://www.kith.org/journals/jed/2009/06/12/12163.html)

M: Mary Doria Russell. K. Tempest Bradford, Moondancer Drake, Amal El-Mohtar, Sumana Harihareswara

Everyone on the panel but Mary Doria Russell was a person of color. I would estimate that K. Tempest Bradford, Amal El-Mohtar, and Sumana Harihareswara are all of roughly the same twenties-early-thirties generation; Moondancer Drake is maybe a half-generation older; and Mary Doria Russell is about sixty (per Wikipedia).

This report will be in three parts: an accuracy/nomenclature preface; notes on what was said at the panel; and follow-up thoughts.

First, the accuracy/nomenclature preface:

I took notes on a netbook. I type and process fast, so everything is a close paraphrase unless otherwise noted, either by quotation marks which indicates that I believe I am reporting verbatim, or by a qualifying statement. Corrections, additions, and requests for clarification are welcome.

After much thought, I have decided to refer to everyone on a panel by their first names after the first mention. I personally have difficulty parsing con reports that refer to panelists by initials, and since I think of most people on these panels by their first name and 95% of the time they referred to each other by first name, I thought it better to go for consistency: I did not want any meaning attached to any slips I might make into first names.

Second, the panel notes:

Mary Doria Russell opened the introductions by reading two lists. First:

  • little women
  • little old women
  • little old gray-haired women
  • little old gray-haired Asian women

Question: when did it change? L.M. Alcott to Amy Tan

Another list:

  • caramel
  • oil
  • leather
  • peat
  • honey
  • apple-pie
  • vanilla
  • molasses
  • cinnamon
  • coffee
  • toffee
  • tea
  • walnut
  • cloves
  • sesame
  • coconut
  • cream soda (giggles from audience)
  • butterscotch

These were words used to describe liquors—so it's not the words themselves but the cliches being used

Sumana Harihareswara: replacement for Rachel Virginia Swirsky; proposed this panel

K. Tempest Bradford: read a story describing skin as "cafe au lait." Grew up in Ohio so didn't have anyplace to get, but eventually figured out it meant her. Adopted usage as young writer but then stopped: so if take away easy metaphors, what do you do next? Also previously tweeted something about having skin so like chocolate that has to restrain self from gnawing own arm.

Moondancer Drake: writes multicultural fiction, feels obligation to convey that is multicultural so has to do a lot of description without being squicky, repetitive, etc.

Amal El-Mohtar: "I really like food." (audience laughter) "I confess that when I'm around Tempest I often have to restrain myself from wanting to gnaw on her arm." Wants senses to be implicated in her writing, does use food a lot and is sensitive to issue because is aware that can be squicky. One story opened with comparison to cinnamon. Note: this is "And Their Lips Rang with the Sun" at Strange Horizons, which I like a lot and recommend:

Look at them! Are they not beautiful? Had cinnamon been ground and rubbed into their skin, they could not have been more brown, more fragrant, more beloved of the wine-bright sky.

Mary asks for examples of apt, non-cliched, useful for reader examples

Tempest: find often people afraid to say, "her skin was brown," need to stop that. Nothing wrong with reaching for poetry, but. Catherynne M. Valente's Orphan's Tales, 1st book, Sigrid meets someone not human with literally black skin, remarks that "hey, unlike me who is called black, this person actually is"--from herself, avoid awkwardness of self-description

Moondancer: "brown" doesn't always suffice if multiple characters and want to convey lighter/darker, isn't sufficient gradation

Amal: one of difficulties here is have to talk about these examples in vacuum, in a story text it's not (panel makes jokes about SF scenarios). Story that used "cinnamon" was doing a lot of landscape comparison, at one point used frankincense bark for comparison for pallor. If story describes everything in terms of food, "equal opportunity cannibalism", perhaps removes commodified/objectified/exoticized effect

Sumana: but one of problems is everything get commodified

Tempest: "skin was the shiny silver of an iPad"

Sumana: food very familiar, Weird Al didn't realize had so many food songs until label wanted to do anthology; so food familiar, as are cliches about minerals and wood and such, but are people really spending time in nature? references are to commodified versions. Contrast with N.K. Jemisin's Hundred Thousand Kingdoms:

I am not very interesting to look at. It might have been different if I had gotten the traits of my two peoples in a better combination—Amn height with Darre curves, perhaps, or thick straight Darre hair colored Amn-pale. I have Amn eyes: faded green in color, more unnerving than pretty. Otherwise, I am short and flat and brown as forestwood, and my hair is a curled mess. Because I find it unmanageable otherwise, I wear it short. I am sometimes mistaken for a boy.

Uses wood as flat and boring and non-exotic-y, not male gaze.

Tempest: that's a problem faced more, not that words are wrong but that gaze is wrong, exoticizing gaze. One way to combat: how do people of color describe each other? One of her stories had POV character who spends lot of time coveting other girls' looks, including someone "light-skinned" which means specific things among black people (or "high yellow"? not sure heard properly). Lots of problematicness in that phrase, which was trying to convey. Editor suggested change to "fair-skinned," no, term used about white women

Sumana: move beyond skin color: no pimples, hair length, textures

Tempest: "no more hair like wool"

(someone else, I think) though Bible does describe Jesus's hair like wool

Tempest: there you go, people will say "well it's in the Bible"

Mary: "They say a lot of shit in the Bible, I would not go there."

audience: question re: using other characters to provide reactions to convey description (said had been told needed to make clear that POV character was a girl right away. Sumana: "What, we have to warn for that?" Tempest, in booming voice: "Lady parts!")

Mary: think other characters' reactions are economical way of building world in which character has to survive and getting information to reader about character's identity--not just visual image but society. Is anthropologist, her skin tone is seriously "swine-pink" (anthropologists used to go out with paint chips). Useful to do contrasts/comparison. Gives comparison example she wrote about herself (ETA: as she is now), going into urban high school, feeling tiny around strapping 6' confident black girls who grew up on hormone-fed beef (ETA: possibly "hamburgers") and who had elaborate tattoos.

(Other people have told me that they remembered hearing "Amazons"; it's not in my notes but it's plausible. I also recall "surrounded," but I'm not sure that if that's a quote or an inference from the feel of the description.)

audience: asks for suggestions for writer who literally has never seen POC (I infer from context and later comments that referring to self)

Moondancer: has a POV character who is blind: uses regional accent, perfume, relationship with touch, skin feel

Mary: asks audience member how solved herself

same audience member: is a synaesthete, but difficulty is from sighted person POV

Mary: beta readers, lots of them

audience member: can't have one black friend stand for everyone

Tempest: shouldn't always focus just on looks, what else marks them from specific time, place, culture? ties back into "just say brown," that is the least of your worries in building up character who is real and comes across to reader

Sumana: if people are going to assume that unmarked character looks like the majority, part of answer is not just what writers do, but illustrators and translators do; what is state of illustration?

(there is a digression into covers and perceptions of publishers/buyers, which I do not take notes on because it is a digression and because I have my hand up)

me: asked writers to please specify white if also specifying non-white; important that white not be unmarked state, also helps me calibrate descriptions (that is, otherwise I wonder if you're using Harlequin-style descriptions where "dark" means "southern Italian"). Then I asked about descriptions differing depending on distance of POV, e.g., omniscient or tight-third a la Bujold. In Mary's description, I felt like it was conveying that character was feeling threatened a bit with the tall and tattoos. I ended on plea to stop first-person mirror scenes.

Mary: (quick response before someone else follows up) no! just little

Sumana: Babysitters Club books, those told from Jessi's POV will have somewhere in early chapter, "I'm black and I have to tell you that because otherwise you won't think it" (possibly with mirror), go Ann Martin breaking the 4th wall!

Mary: she writes in not quite omni, inflicts narration with character POV. Nuances (I think, of that narration) very important; not a visual/image thinker

Amal: from her academic side, called free indirect speech (Google is a wonderful thing; I heard this as "free and direct speech"), i.e., not dialogue, third person narration, yet narration inflected by character's personality: Emma, Dubliners.

Amal con't: going back to Mary's description [*], had a twinge, moment of wondering if own self or new character: something to be unpacked, not necessarily about what character is feeling in that moment but how other people will perceive, so one of things to be aware, readers bring different experiences

[*] I am using "Mary's description" here because I did not write down specifically when panelists or audience members said "you" or "Ms. Russell." However, I distinctly remember that several times from this point on panelists addressed her as "Ms. Russell," and perhaps even exclusively. I did not, but I had to fight my instinct to. More on this later.

Mary: and as story develops will become clear what character feels

Moondancer: adds to importance to not relying on just visual descriptions

audience member: puts in further plea for specificity about visual description for "white" beyond hair color, eye color

Sumana: refers to Mary Anne Mohanraj's guest post on Scalzi's blog in which she regretted had fleshed out South Asian character way more than white character who was from a single heritage--Sumana: "wow, that sounds like a malt" (I don't see that specific comment in the post, but maybe it was in comments) (ETA: see comments)

Tempest: (hugely paraphrased) if put as much effort into describing white characters as characters of color, find strategies and ways to avoid fail

audience (Florian): one of problems with description is types of characters that get written: white young thin gender-conforming able-bodied. Goes back to Mary's description, cultural narrative being tapped into of fragile white woman, never see black people described as fragile, tapping into stereotypes of big black women, so should diversify characters that we write about

Tempest: yes, thin able-bodied is another assumed default; how does character move, etc. Re: Mary's description: "urban" pinged her, stereotypical shorthand, need to stop using; felt like looking down from class POV

Mary: isn't that funny, was thinking about looking up at women who were taking up space in way that made them powerful and confident, more awestruck than frightened, so surprised by reaction

(I think here is where she mentioned as an anthropologist thinking about differences in nutrition. I know she mentioned it at some point and this is the logical one, but I am not entirely sure.)

Tempest: coming from different cultural perspectives

Mary: yes absolutely!

Sumana: we're your beta-readers on this!

audience: Jacqueline Carey, Neil Gaiman both wrote books only describing skin color of "white" people; seconds ideas about perspective, doesn't just want to get appearance right and not anything else

Amal: awkward to recommend because read before grew social conscience, but really liked No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency because main character is fat, doesn't seem to be an issue

Sumana: is issue later in series though character stays happy with self as is

(I am told by people who have read them more recently that they portray a very romanticized Africa with "wisdom of simple folk" kind of overtones. They are written by a white Scottish guy.)

audience: is worried about being too subtle and audiences missing

Moondancer, Tempest: there will always be things that people miss

Mary: go subtle, then if betas missing, push it more until comes across without beating over head

audience: references movie? called El Dago? re: Mexican Revolution, learned how to make mole to be like awesome character Petra

audience (different): may be helpful to think of ethnicity rather than race, because ties into to cultural references; as reader, appreciate when stories use those because can look up (to convey skin colors, might not get into X sorority but would get into Y--which Tempest loved, and I hope she or someone else who got the reference will explain)

audience (different): something about reimagining character and becoming more real/attached as writing

Third, the follow-up thoughts:

I want to preface this by saying that I spent a lot of time at the con talking about this panel and frequently said that I thought that it was very instructive. Which I do, but I fear that comment may have minimized or dismissed how offensive Mary Doria Russell's description was and how upsetting other people found it, whether because its offensive stereotypes hit closer to home or for other reasons. (As a woman of Asian ancestry, I get a pretty dissimilar set of stereotypes.) It wasn't my intention, but it may easily have had that effect. I apologize for being thoughtless in the way I spoke.

Here are the ways (many!) in which I think the panel was instructive.

The description itself.

I can see how it started out; Mary said that she found it useful to describe things by contrast, and clearly she went for maximum contrast. Which gets you extremes of height and skin color and age. But pretty much everything else in the description was not required for that purpose, and instead reveals non-conscious stereotypical associations. Put another way, tall black and young doesn't get you "urban," doesn't get you "hormone-fed beef," doesn't get you "elaborate tattoos," doesn't get you the word or implication of "surrounded."

Which reveal the aforementioned stereotypical associations, most of which were discussed during the panel, but one that came up after was the "hormone-fed beef." This undercuts the stated conscious consideration of differences in nutrition because it implies an external unnatural modern influence on the teenagers' bodies. Further, it evokes the idea of the oversexed black woman.

Because I always have to say this: I am not saying that Mary Doria Russell is a bad person or had bad intentions. I am saying that racist attitudes are pervasive in society and sink down into people's worldviews and if they aren't noticed and examined and questioned, they enter into writing exercises (and many other things!) and are hurtful and offensive and reinforce structures of oppression. So people need to be aware of the existence of these stereotypes, rigorously question their own words and actions when they approach areas of stereotype, and listen to other people's critique--especially when preparing for a panel on avoiding fail, oh my goodness. To do otherwise is irresponsible and entirely worthy of critique.

The response.

This is now Exhibit A for "it is so not true that mean brown people are just waiting to pounce on any little thing and tear people to shreds." Every single damn person in that room bent over backwards to be polite and respectful and non-confrontational. I mean, panelists were calling her "Ms. Russell!" When was the last time you heard one panelist accord another an honorific? People were incredibly careful to phrase things in terms of the writing and not the person who wrote them—I did it myself when I said it sounded like "her character" was feeling threatened, when she'd explicitly said she was describing herself.

Which shows two related things in turn. As we discussed on the FAIL! panel later, it's the people who are privileged and powerful who fail. (On the relevant axis, that is. Mary Doria Russell doesn't have privilege when talking about gender, but she does about race.) As a result it is hard to speak up against offensive and oppressive statements. I have been getting more practice in these things and I still had to psych myself up and plan it out and brace against a hostile response. (No cookies, please.) And I was in the audience and have no career aspirations in the SFF industry. (One of the reasons I raised my hand is that I could tell at least some of the panelists had reactions to that description and I thought, whether rightly or wrongly I do not know, that it might be easier for them if the subject had been raised first by an audience member.)

And this is an example of how not to escalate the situation when your actions are challenged as problematic. Mary didn't apologize. But she didn't say that people were wrong/ignorant/racist/(personal insult here) for criticizing her description, or walk out of the panel, or declare her massive personal offense, or any of the other horrible things I was imagining and I'm sure many other people were too. I realize that this is sad, that "listening to criticism with apparent good humor and responding calmly" is surprising. But just as it's hard to give criticism, it's hard to receive it too, especially in real time, and especially when it's about race. She could have handled it better. But she also could have handled it much worse.

ETA: a bit more discussion about "better" in comments.

Finally, this is now my example for why it is not intrinsically easier to have conversations about race in person rather than online. It was harder for me to speak in the panel than it would have been to comment online. It was probably harder for Mary to hear things and process them in real-time than to read them and have the luxury of time to think before responding. These things may be offset by other factors, but that (1) is another set of panels and (2) does not change that it was not easier by virtue of being in person.

Also, the rest of the panel was interesting and useful as well, and I hope it doesn't get overshadowed.

ETA 6/2/11: Mary Doria Russell has commented via a friend and apologized.

cofax7: climbing on an abbey wall  (Default)

[personal profile] cofax7 2011-06-01 04:24 am (UTC)(link)
This is very interesting. Thank you for writing it up. And for the discussion about, well, the meta of the discussion itself.
scifantasy: Me. With an owl. (Default)

[personal profile] scifantasy 2011-06-01 04:33 am (UTC)(link)
Randomly--I met Sumana...a year or so back, I think, at a Tor.com meetup. Her website is http://www.brainwane.net/ (but the weblog doesn't yet mention Wiscon, I guess she hasn't had the time to update it, not that I blame her). Sounds like she had some good points, such as the context one (by the way, I read The Hundred Thousand Kindgoms recently, and I think I may have been set up with overly high expectations by praise from others and my reaction to same--I thought it was good but not incredible the way others, such as [personal profile] james_davis_nicoll, did) or "move beyond skin color."

I can't see what made Russell think that description was a good idea. Why she would even tell the story, especially like that? At best it's off the topic. (You say you think it was supposed to be a study in contrasts, which...um? Not sure I quite understand.)

A note on the terminology--I would not be surprised if people started using the honorific because they were upset, as a...distancing mechanism, maybe. Not that this undermines your point, that they were trying not to be confrontational and to be polite; but if nothing else, that change in terminology would be consistent with--I don't know how to convey this properly, but--a signal that "you aren't a friend, we aren't having a friendly conversation, you've erected a wall and we're going to formality as a response."
technoknob: (Default)

[personal profile] technoknob 2011-06-01 05:55 am (UTC)(link)
You say you think it was supposed to be a study in contrasts, which...um? Not sure I quite understand.

Kate will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Mary was making a contrast between her appearance and the appearance of the other girls. Her study in contrasts essentially assumed everyone already knew her appearance because they could see her right there on the panel.

But it does invoke, at least in text as I read this summary, the idea that white is default and the other girls in her class needed describing because they weren't default.

(no subject)

[personal profile] phi - 2011-06-02 01:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] rosefox - 2011-06-01 09:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] chomiji - 2011-06-01 15:58 (UTC) - Expand

[personal profile] keeva 2011-06-01 04:49 am (UTC)(link)
quick editing note, you have 6" listed for the height of the "urban" young women, you mean 6'

(no subject)

[identity profile] mikeda.livejournal.com - 2011-06-01 12:38 (UTC) - Expand
avram: (Default)

[personal profile] avram 2011-06-01 05:41 am (UTC)(link)
or "high yellow"? not sure heard properly

I've seen "yellow" and "high yellow" used to describe light-skinned African-Americans. There might be connotations to it other than just lightness.
rosefox: Green books on library shelves. (Default)

[personal profile] rosefox 2011-06-01 09:23 am (UTC)(link)
There are several hundred years of colorist connotations attached to those terms. Wikipedia has a very brief rundown.

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 15:11 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sethg - 2011-06-14 16:57 (UTC) - Expand
nancylebov: (green leaves)

[personal profile] nancylebov 2011-06-01 10:46 am (UTC)(link)
Is there any reason to think people are taller if they get hormone-fed beef? My impression was that people grow to their maximum genetic potential if they get good nourishment when they're growing.

(no subject)

[personal profile] daedala - 2011-06-01 18:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] fjm - 2011-06-01 12:54 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 15:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 17:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 17:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 18:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] badgerbag - 2011-06-03 01:54 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] keeva - 2011-06-02 04:03 (UTC) - Expand
meaghansketch: A self portrait of the author (Default)

[personal profile] meaghansketch 2011-06-01 11:05 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you for the write-up. This is a panel I wish I'd had a chance to go to.
jjhunter: Watercolor of daisy with blue dots zooming around it like Bohr model electrons (Default)

[personal profile] jjhunter 2011-06-01 11:54 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you for sharing your notes and follow-up thoughts--I think I'll be returning to them more than once.
kass: Shepherd Book; caption "The Good Book." (book)

[personal profile] kass 2011-06-01 12:14 pm (UTC)(link)
Mary: "They say a lot of shit in the Bible, I would not go there."

AHAHAHAHA so true. And I adore the Bible, but I am here to tell you, it is a canon in serious need of the occasional transformative work.

(no subject)

[personal profile] trinker - 2011-06-03 08:17 (UTC) - Expand
princessofgeeks: (Damn Fangirls by Lotr Junkie)

[personal profile] princessofgeeks 2011-06-01 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
thank you for the post.
fjm: (Default)

[personal profile] fjm 2011-06-01 12:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Very good post, with excellent analysis. Thank you.
sartorias: (Default)

[personal profile] sartorias 2011-06-01 01:10 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh this is so very valuable, it goes beyond interesting.

The thing that resonates with me (being Mary Doria Russel's age) is what you say about having to process in person, at the moment, and of course with a zillion faces staring at you, knowing that you fucked up before you actually realize you did.

How to recognize these otherwise invisible pitfalls if you're over fifty, and how to deal . . . I think there could be a valuable panel just in that alone.

(no subject)

[personal profile] sartorias - 2011-06-01 15:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 17:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] daedala - 2011-06-01 15:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] daedala - 2011-06-01 16:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] daedala - 2011-06-01 17:06 (UTC) - Expand


(Anonymous) - 2011-06-01 18:14 (UTC) - Expand

Re: betas

[personal profile] daedala - 2011-06-01 18:24 (UTC) - Expand


[personal profile] mme_hardy - 2011-06-02 15:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] mme_hardy - 2011-06-02 14:44 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] cosmic-llin.livejournal.com 2011-06-01 01:49 pm (UTC)(link)
Thanks for posting this, it's really interesting and useful.
heavenscalyx: (Default)

[personal profile] heavenscalyx 2011-06-01 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Thank you for writing this up! I have been struggling with finding adjectives for skin color and have settled simply on "brown" with adjectival gradations.

[personal profile] tool_of_satan 2011-06-01 02:18 pm (UTC)(link)
to convey skin colors, might not get into X sorority but would get into Y--which Tempest loved, and I hope she or someone else who got the reference will explain

Traditionally African-American sororities - or at least some of them - would select in part based on skin tone (with the more prestigious ones looking for lighter skin). That about exhausts my knowledge of the subject, unfortunately.

(no subject)

[personal profile] al_zorra - 2011-06-01 15:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] al_zorra - 2011-06-01 16:00 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 17:35 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] al_zorra - 2011-06-01 18:10 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 18:16 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] al_zorra - 2011-06-01 22:50 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 17:46 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 18:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] tool_of_satan - 2011-06-01 23:13 (UTC) - Expand
brainwane: My smiling face in front of a brick wall, May 2015. (Default)

Thank you!

[personal profile] brainwane 2011-06-01 02:51 pm (UTC)(link)
This is Sumana Harihareswara here. Thank you so much for writing this detailed report! A few additions and clarifications, focusing on me and what I said since that's what I know best:

I'm Sumana, not Sumuna (in a few places you have misspelled my first name).

I was a very very last-minute replacement for Ms. Swirsky, and I think I was the only fan (not a fiction writer) on the panel.

As you note I said: if people are going to assume that unmarked character looks like the majority, part of answer is not just what writers do, but illustrators and translators do; what is state of illustration? Wish I had made this point more clearly but I was afraid of derailing the discussion. There are elements of reader expectation, outside the text itself, that we as a publishing and reading community can address. When I read something that's been translated from a language spoken primarily by people of color, or written or set in a majority nonwhite country, I'll start off assuming that the characters are people of color. When I see cover art featuring people of color: ditto. So, I want editors to be getting more stories in translation and from other countries, I want readers to seek out works in translation, and I want illustrators to be inclusive and accurate in depicting people of color.

The "wow, that sounds like a malt" was my own addition, not Ms. Mohanraj's. As I said the words "single heritage" I realized that what I'd just said sounded like I was describing Scotch/whiskey/bourbon or the like, and thus made the joke. By the way, the short story she was talking about, and her comment:

But I realized, in thinking about this whole debate, that the other two characters are, once again, generic white -- one male, one female. No discernible ethnic background. No class background. And I didn't notice that while I was writing the story. Damn.

And I may have started the "Ms. Russell" thing. I couldn't remember whether her first name was Mary or Maria, because I was mixing it up with her middle name Doria, and besides that couldn't tell whether I should be calling her Mary or Mary Doria, so I just went with "Ms. Russell." I sometimes do the honorific + last name form of address in conversations, to add variation for the sake of variety, to signify respect, to jokingly act formal when we aren't really being formal, or so on. I didn't mean to contribute to a fraught atmosphere! Sounds like I did, argh.

Thank you again for the panel report -- and thank you for getting it up so quickly!
Edited (corrected link to "Jump Space") 2011-06-01 14:53 (UTC)

Re: Thank you!

[personal profile] brainwane - 2011-06-01 18:02 (UTC) - Expand
sparkymonster: (Default)

[personal profile] sparkymonster 2011-06-01 03:27 pm (UTC)(link)
oh also.

I have anthropological training. I'm 98.44% sure they don't use paint chips any more. Also, that attempt to gather "neutral information" I would argue was not neutral at all.

There is a LONG LONG history of anthropologists being racist, sexist, etc. and also of anthropologists using science to "prove" that native peoples are inherently "noble savages."

Part of my first class about anthropology included reading multiple anthropological texts about one particular tribe (the !Kung) and seeing how race/gender/class/etc affected how anthropologists wrote their allegedly neutral observations.

Given the timing of when Ms. Russell probably earned her Phd in Physical Anthropology, I suspect that the idea of paint chips was a radical new idea. And yes trying to find ways to describe skin color in more objective terms than "dark" is a good thing. Just um... OK. So that is a good example of terminology that comes out of a particular context (the academic field of physical anthropology) that does not seem to have translated well out of that context.

Um....I have to run off but I want to add one thing
American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race" (May 17, 1998)
sparkymonster: (Default)

[personal profile] sparkymonster 2011-06-01 03:28 pm (UTC)(link)
and quote from that statement.
In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

At the end of the 20th century, we now understand that human cultural behavior is learned, conditioned into infants beginning at birth, and always subject to modification. No human is born with a built-in culture or language. Our temperaments, dispositions, and personalities, regardless of genetic propensities, are developed within sets of meanings and values that we call "culture." Studies of infant and early childhood learning and behavior attest to the reality of our cultures in forming who we are.

Commissioned by the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association, a position paper on race was authored by Audrey Smedley (Race in North America: Origin and Evolution of a Worldview, 1993) and thrice reviewed by a working group of prominent anthropologists: George Armelagos, Michael Blakey, C. Loring Brace, Alan Goodman, Faye Harrison, Jonathan Marks, Yolanda Moses, and Carol Mukhopadhyay. A draft of the current paper was published in the September 1997 Anthropology Newsletter and posted ont the AAA website http://www.aaanet.org for a number of months, and member comments were requested. While Smedley assumed authorship of the final draft, she received comments not only from the working group but also from the AAA membership and other interested readers. The paper above was adopted by the AAA Executive Board on May 17, 1998, as an official statement of AAA's position on "race."

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 15:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 15:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-01 15:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: betas

[personal profile] mme_hardy - 2011-06-02 14:48 (UTC) - Expand
pretzelcoatl: Second verse, same as the first. (Default)

[personal profile] pretzelcoatl 2011-06-01 03:52 pm (UTC)(link)
Thank you for writing this up. This was one of the panels I did really want to go to.

Also, it was really nice being on the Vigorous Debate panel with you. I was incredibly nervous about that one since it was my first ever, so I hope I wasn't too awkward during that -- you brought up a lot of excellent things which I took away from it. :)

(no subject)

[personal profile] popelizbet - 2011-06-14 22:53 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] thomasyan - 2011-06-02 17:16 (UTC) - Expand
gloss: (Colleen Wing)

[personal profile] gloss 2011-06-01 04:05 pm (UTC)(link)
here via [personal profile] keeva - thanks for such a thorough write-up, but even more for your thoughtful commentary.

(no subject)

[personal profile] technoknob - 2011-06-03 07:34 (UTC) - Expand
thistleingrey: (Default)

[personal profile] thistleingrey 2011-06-01 08:57 pm (UTC)(link)
Whew. Thanks both for posting notes and for hosting comments; both have been instructive, in a good way.
kgbooklog: (Default)

[personal profile] kgbooklog 2011-06-01 10:12 pm (UTC)(link)
tall black and young doesn't get you "urban,"

Something I hadn't seen anyone else mention: in some parts of the publishing world, "urban" does mean "black". "Urban Fiction" is explicitly about blacks and for blacks, as can be shown if you do an image search for "urban book cover". Luckily, bookstores are diligent in making sure white people never see these books.
sparkymonster: (Default)

[personal profile] sparkymonster 2011-06-01 10:51 pm (UTC)(link)
And yet "urban fantasy" is not "fantasy novels by/about black people" (SAD FACE FOREVER)

"Urban" is coded way of saying "black" and it also often has classist connotations of being poor and black.

(no subject)

[personal profile] aquaeri - 2011-06-05 05:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-05 19:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] aquaeri - 2011-06-06 04:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] adelheid - 2011-06-03 03:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] adelheid - 2011-06-12 06:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] sparkymonster - 2011-06-05 19:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] adelheid - 2011-06-12 06:32 (UTC) - Expand
tanyad: (Default)

[personal profile] tanyad 2011-06-01 11:09 pm (UTC)(link)
Thanks for the write up! This is one panel I was sad about missing out on. So much to think about!

veejane: Pleiades (Default)

[personal profile] veejane 2011-06-02 01:53 am (UTC)(link)
Tempest, in booming voice: "Lady parts!"

I can totally hear this in my head.
phi: (Default)

[personal profile] phi 2011-06-02 01:57 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you for the writeup and the commentary!
delux_vivens: (eating white peepul)

all i can think to say is...

[personal profile] delux_vivens 2011-06-02 06:31 am (UTC)(link)
the cows had tattoos?
saraphina_marie: (Esmeralda)

From Mary who is having trouble commenting:

[personal profile] saraphina_marie 2011-06-02 02:52 pm (UTC)(link)
I volunteered my DW account to speak for Mary who makes the following statement for the record:

"I was indeed surprised and dismayed that my remarks were found to be offensive, hurtful and/or boneheaded. I regret this, and I apologize."

Page 1 of 2

<< [1] [2] >>