David Anthony Durham on being a "color blind" reader

[salinea]

I don't see how being a color-blind means going along with the flow of society's racism. If the society is racist, i.e. not color-blind, being color-blind does go against the flow. You don't have to be trying to turn the flow to go against it.

And being color-blind and acting against racism are hardly mutually exclusive.

If you're really colour blind then you cannot realize when racism is occuring. If you are not aware of what 'race' people belong to, then you cannot see the pattern by which they are being systematically discriminated against.

If, to keep with Durham's exemple you don't know which writers are Black, then you cannot realize that Black writers are ever so oddly rare in the SFF field. Which is a real issue.

It's a way to not notice a problem, because it doesn't concern you.

I don't actually colour blindness is always a bad thing (I think it's great for casting actors for exemple). I think it is bad when it's used as an excuse for white people to not question their own behaviour and to dismiss complains against racism. And I have seen it used pretty often in that manner.

[Nous]

If you're really colour blind then you cannot realize when racism is occuring. If you are not aware of what 'race' people belong to, then you cannot see the pattern by which they are being systematically discriminated against.

Color blindness, the way I and others of its proponents use the term, does not mean being literally unaware of a person's race. It just means that race is not used as a measure of the person's worth, competence, morality, or the like. One does not decide how to treat him based on his race.

One doesn't have to use race as a standard when making decisions to recognize that others may do so, or to notice it when it happens.

[salinea]

Color blindness, the way I and others of its proponents use the term, does not mean being literally unaware of a person's race. It just means that race is not used as a measure of the person's worth, competence, morality, or the like. One does not decide how to treat him based on his race.

One doesn't have to use race as a standard when making decisions to recognize that others may do so, or to notice it when it happens.

And as I told you above that's not the use of 'colour blindness' I'm refering to and not the one i've seen used in such similar cases. We're talking about something more specific, which i have seen happen, when someone uses so-called 'colour blindness' to avoid listening to people when they complain about racism.

[Nous]

In that case, the term is being misused.

[Altherion]

Yes, this is precisely why I don't like that term. It is far better to say directly that race is not a factor in one's judgement of a person's character, worth, etc.

[salinea]

In that case, the term is being misused.

Yeah. But it does happen in a systematic way, that's why it needs to be addressed. Discussions about racism are very often dismissed easily by people because they don't suffer from it.

For further information look out at this essay How to suppress discussions about racism (this link does address the colour blind issue among other things)

There's also this little comic : White lies

These are all extremely common reactions to when someone wants to mention, discuss or fights against racism in any kind of fields.

So... SF/F is a field with a starkingly rarity of Black writers, and where Black protagonists is also rather rare, and where the handling of Black characters when they are included can be problematic.

This concerns us because we are readers and fans of SF/F, and because racism concerns all of us. We can't and shouldn't dismiss these issues just because, being not racist ourselves, we do not pay attention to the skin colour of writers. We shouldn't use our own lack of racism as an excuse to look away when a problem is pointed to us. One of the solution is to pay attention to the skin colour of writers and characters in order to realize and understand the problem, and to actively welcome more Black writers and racial problematics in the things we read (by buying them and reccomending them, etc.)

Would you disagree with any of that?

[Altherion]

So... SF/F is a field with a starkingly rarity of Black writers, and where Black protagonists is also rather rare, and where the handling of Black characters when they are included can be problematic.

The lack of authors is an issue, the handling of characters not so much. See, the problem with black protagonists (or protagonists of any other race) is that in order for them to somehow be distinguished from the crowd the society of the story must be inherently racist. That is, the people in the story must react differently to each other depending on the color of their skin. There is nothing inherently special about them (the difference is a chemical present in the skin); there must be something in the society that makes it so.

Is it possible to imagine such a society? Sure -- history up to the present day proves that it can exist. But I think you will find a substantial lack of people who want to do so. Even in stories set in variations of the real world you're far more likely to find characters that are black, but this has only superficial consequences. For example, look at Kingsley Shacklebolt (from Harry Potter). He's not a protagonist, but he's certainly an admirable character (elite Auror, becomes Minster for Magic at the end of the story and does quite well as such). But his skin could just as well have been another color and it would not have changed anything substantial in his story. And if you're talking about the future or even the present, this is IMHO as it should be.

We shouldn't use our own lack of racism as an excuse to look away when a problem is pointed to us.

Absolutely.

One of the solution is to pay attention to the skin colour of writers and characters in order to realize and understand the problem, and to actively welcome more Black writers and racial problematics in the things we read (by buying them and reccomending them, etc.)

Absolutely not. This is not a solution, this is a means of perpetuating the problem. Books ought to be selected based on their own merit, not based on who wrote them.

If I discriminate based on race (or based on any other characteristic people are born with), I am cheating both myself and other authors. Myself, because I can only read so many books at a time and reading one because its author has a certain characteristic means I don't get to read another one which appears to be very interesting based on everything I've heard about it. Other authors for the same reason: one fewer person reads the book of somebody more skilled (or at least more suitable for me). Of course, I might be wrong -- the book which appears very interesting might in fact be inferior -- but this doesn't happen very often to me.

Furthermore, what somebody who follows the prescription in the quote is doing is either outright racist or using doublethink. That is, for the purpose of selecting books, black people are to be treated differently based on race alone... but presumably, in the rest of the world, they should be treated as equal to other people, right? I don't know about you, but my mind is not very compatible with doublethink.

[Bellis]

But his skin could just as well have been another color and it would not have changed anything substantial in his story. And if you're talking about the future or even the present, this is IMHO as it should be.

Actually - I hate it when this happens. It's completely unrealistic and a cop-out on the part of the author. You don't have a black, female, or other ethnic minority, instead you have a "white" person with black skin, who is treated as a "white" person with black skin (or a "male" with boobs in the case of females) by other characters in the story. This is colour-blindness in writing, and while it may work in a "fantasy" it doesn't work in any sort of story that claims to reflect reality (and i don't believe these issues ever really disappear, even in the future). Instead of dealing with how diversity affects the members of your society (both the minorities and the majorities, both in societies with equality and those without), the author ignores it completely.

[Altherion]

Actually - I hate it when this happens. It's completely unrealistic and a cop-out on the part of the author. You don't have a black, female, or other ethnic minority, instead you have a "white" person with black skin, who is treated as a "white" person with black skin (or a "male" with boobs in the case of females) by other characters in the story.

But in a society without discrimination (or in the society of Harry Potter, where they have a much more tangible difference to discriminate based on), what exactly is the difference between the various racial and ethnic groups?

This is colour-blindness in writing, and while it may work in a "fantasy" it doesn't work in any sort of story that claims to reflect reality (and i don't believe these issues ever really disappear, even in the future).

You know, this might be the sole real difference between us. I believe that they have greatly diminished over time and are continuing to diminish even now. IMHO, in a century or so, they'll be negligible.

[Filippa Eilhart]

so it boils down to this: is everything you do meant to change the world for the better, or is it only for your own entertainment?

people will respond differently depending on their goal.

[salinea]

The lack of authors is an issue, the handling of characters not so much. See, the problem with black protagonists (or protagonists of any other race) is that in order for them to somehow be distinguished from the crowd the society of the story must be inherently racist. That is, the people in the story must react differently to each other depending on the color of their skin. There is nothing inherently special about them (the difference is a chemical present in the skin); there must be something in the society that makes it so.

Errr. The handling of characters can be an issue in general. I wasn't talking specifically about 'colour blind' handling of character. Things like Magical Negroes or Closer to the Earth primitives and all the spectrum of racial stereotypes (which even GRRM isn't above using, just to show you that racism is so instutionnal even a liberal minded and good writer like GRRM can fall into those trapping).

I don't have much issue with JKR's handling of characters of Colour in HP, although I'd rather if she had put one of these characters as a main character rather than have all of them in the background. I do think Kingsley is a pretty cool character ^^ (although I have issue with some of the handling in the movies).

As whether or not they should be handled as you mention or as Bellis mentions, with taking into consideration possible discrimination (as Bellis says), I think that both can be done well, and both can be done badly.

Absolutely not. This is not a solution, this is a means of perpetuating the problem. Books ought to be selected based on their own merit, not based on who wrote them.

I'm not asking to do this with bad books! I ask people to do this with books which suffers from discrimination, so as to re-balance the equation.

Think of it as how people pimp books by new, not yet very well known writers. For exemple how many people are reccing and talking about Lynch because he's a good writer but he's a new writer who doesn't have as much chance yet to get prizes and stuff? That's the kind of thing I mean.

Is that so unfair to do? Is that cheating?

If I discriminate based on race (or based on any other characteristic people are born with), I am cheating both myself and other authors. Myself, because I can only read so many books at a time and reading one because its author has a certain characteristic means I don't get to read another one which appears to be very interesting based on everything I've heard about it. Other authors for the same reason: one fewer person reads the book of somebody more skilled (or at least more suitable for me).

Why do you assume the book by non white writer won't be as good or as interesting to you? You migh be surprised. And this book already doesn't enjoy as much publicity or visibility as the one which appears to be interesting to you, so you need to go out of you way to find it.

Of course, I might be wrong -- the book which appears very interesting might in fact be inferior -- but this doesn't happen very often to me.

Not inferior to the book you haven't read? How do you know?

Furthermore, what somebody who follows the prescription in the quote is doing is either outright racist or using doublethink.

Can we stop it with accusing anti-racism of racism? It's like equating Israel with nazis. I hate the stuff. It's really offensive.

Racism=power+discrimination.

Unless we're talking of a specific circumstances where Black people have more power than white, the term racism oughtn't be used.

That is, for the purpose of selecting books, black people are to be treated differently based on race alone... but presumably, in the rest of the world, they should be treated as equal to other people, right? I don't know about you, but my mind is not very compatible with doublethink.

The problem is they're not currently treated as equal. And because a lot of this discrimination happens a level you don't have access (publishers, marketting, book stores) the only thing you can do to fight against it is a form of positive discrimination as customer and member of the SFF fandom.

[salinea]

so it boils down to this: is everything you do meant to change the world for the better, or is it only for your own entertainment?

Or both

ETA: Actually I need to get back to this, really. Why do you expect the book written by a Black writer not to be entertaining? Cannot a book (regardless of who writes it) both address issues about racism without beeing entertaining? Srsly, why should it it an or/or thing?

[Bellis]

But in a society without discrimination (or in the society of Harry Potter, where they have a much more tangible difference to discriminate based on), what exactly is the difference between the various racial and ethnic groups?

You know, this might be the sole real difference between us. I believe that they have greatly diminished over time and are continuing to diminish even now. IMHO, in a century or so, they'll be negligible.

I didn't mind it in HP, because all the asian or black characters were not asian or black as we know them, but merely wizards with slightly differing skin tone. That is, their cultural affiliation was "wizard" not the muggle ethnic grouping. This is the real reason why Kingsley (or the Patils'or Cho's) race meant nothing to the story. However, i think it is important to realize this, and not think that Rowling was somehow expressing "diversity" with this trope.

As for your second point, there is a difference between not discriminating based on ethnic or other differences, and not having these differences at all. While I don't want someone looking at me to discriminate against me because I am a non-white, non-Christian female when judging me on a professional level, I also don't want them to think "oh, she's indistiguishable from a white male WASP". Because I'm not - my background is a huge part of who I am and I don't want that minimized in the name of colourblindness. I also don't think that assimilation to the point where everyone is the same culture is a good end to strive towards.

Now, I have seen SFF where there was a history of discrimination resolved e.g. by assimilation or acceptance of differences, or further segregation. The best SF acknowledges the pros and cons of these approach, often as a contrast to other cultures/planets/civilizations that have taken a different approach. (I'm thinking for instance how Star Trek's federation has gender equality, but there is an understanding that this is not yet a universal nor something that came lightly).

[Filippa Eilhart]

ETA: Actually I need to get back to this, really. Why do you expect the book written by a Black writer not to be entertaining? Cannot a book (regardless of who writes it) both address issues about racism without beeing entertaining? Srsly, why should it it an or/or thing?

I require and expect all my books to be entertaining (ok, maybe except for the gulag archipelago which has been lying on my bookshelf since easter). If I hear about a black entertaining author, I will be happy to read his books. But since my premise is reading entertaining books, and not making the world a better place, I won't go out and search for black authors.

Also, I am with all these people who think the book should defend itself. In our lit interpretation classes we got texts to read and dissect without knowing who their authors were. I liked that.

[Nous]

Stranger,

For further information look out at this essay How to suppress discussions about racism (this link does address the colour blind issue among other things)

There's also this little comic : White lies

These are all extremely common reactions to when someone wants to mention, discuss or fights against racism in any kind of fields.

The first one is good. The comic less so, since some of those responses are quite true and proper, depending on the context they are offered.

So... SF/F is a field with a starkingly rarity of Black writers, and where Black protagonists is also rather rare, and where the handling of Black characters when they are included can be problematic.

This concerns us because we are readers and fans of SF/F, and because racism concerns all of us. We can't and shouldn't dismiss these issues just because, being not racist ourselves, we do not pay attention to the skin colour of writers. We shouldn't use our own lack of racism as an excuse to look away when a problem is pointed to us. One of the solution is to pay attention to the skin colour of writers and characters in order to realize and understand the problem, and to actively welcome more Black writers and racial problematics in the things we read (by buying them and reccomending them, etc.)

Would you disagree with any of that?

The first issue here is to what degree racism is a problem in SF/F. You say there is a rarity of black writers in the field; that is also my impression. But what is the cause? Is it racism in publishing industry? Is it that there are fewer blacks that are into writing SF/F? A mixture of those two or something else? Rarity of black writers does not mean there is a problem of racial discrimination. Black protagonists are rare? Maybe so. That, alone, does not imply racism. It's not like there's some sort of a statistical quota that ought to be filled in a genre. First, if there is a problem, it has to be accurately identified. There can be no solution to an inaccurately or vaguely defined problem.

Now, if there is a significant problem, what to do about that? The primary motivation of people reading SF/F is that they enjoy reading SF/F, I think. I know that is the case with me. If that is jeopardized by this problem, appropriate action ought to be taken regarding it; dealing with this problem ought not undercut enjoying literature. A reader of SF/F has no moral obligation to actively study and analyze the genre from racial perspective--each issue has its own activists who specialize in that kind of thing.

Actively welcoming more black writers in the things we read? I can't agree with you there. I actively welcome good and entertaining writers, and I don't see how focusing on skin color is going to do that. Racial problematics is a valid theme like any other--it should not be overused or it will become boring, though.

[Altherion]

I didn't mind it in HP, because all the asian or black characters were not asian or black as we know them, but merely wizards with slightly differing skin tone. That is, their cultural affiliation was "wizard" not the muggle ethnic grouping. This is the real reason why Kingsley (or the Patils'or Cho's) race meant nothing to the story. However, i think it is important to realize this, and not think that Rowling was somehow expressing "diversity" with this trope.

I think the purpose was to show that wizards were not uniformly white Anglo-Saxons and she succeeded at that.

As for your second point, there is a difference between not discriminating based on ethnic or other differences, and not having these differences at all. While I don't want someone looking at me to discriminate against me because I am a non-white, non-Christian female when judging me on a professional level, I also don't want them to think "oh, she's indistiguishable from a white male WASP". Because I'm not - my background is a huge part of who I am and I don't want that minimized in the name of colourblindness.

I don't understand this. I don't think anyone is likely to confuse you with a male WASP; sane people acknowledge the gender, race and background of people they're dealing with. But the real issue is how human beings interact with each other. Would you really like to be treated differently from a male WASP? And if so, in which ways?

[Larry.]

Food for Thought - Pam Noles' 2006 article, "Shame"

And here's a question to consider (don't answer, don't try to justify, just think about it and keep it to yourself): "If fantasy and science fiction reflects the pasts and possible presents/futures of those that are writing such works, then what will be the appeal of reading such for those who grew up in a system where "escape" was not possible at all and that their concerns/experiences are not reflected at all in the characters?"

[Altherion]

I'm not asking to do this with bad books! I ask people to do this with books which suffers from discrimination, so as to re-balance the equation.

How does a book suffer from discrimination? I mostly read books based on what is recommended here and elsewhere over the internet. I don't know most of the people doing the recommending so can never really be sure, but they don't sound biased.

Why do you assume the book by non white writer won't be as good or as interesting to you?

I do not assume anything of the sort. If I judge the book to be interesting, this discussion does not occur. The reason I spoke of it as less interesting is because that was the starting premise -- that instead of books I was going to read, I go for more diverse ones.

And this book already doesn't enjoy as much publicity or visibility as the one which appears to be interesting to you, so you need to go out of you way to find it.

There are limits to how far out of my way I'm willing to go for entertainment and it is really difficult to tell which of the out-of-the-way books are good.

Not inferior to the book you haven't read? How do you know?

I do not know unless I decide to read both books. However, there have been times when I have done so and I am speaking based on that experience.

Can we stop it with accusing anti-racism of racism? It's like equating Israel with nazis. I hate the stuff. It's really offensive.

Racism=power+discrimination.

Unless we're talking of a specific circumstances where Black people have more power than white, the term racism oughtn't be used.

This is debatable, but I don't want to argue over semantics. Replace every instance of "racism" by "discrimination based on race". I don't want to retroactively edit it so as to limit the confusion.

The problem is they're not currently treated as equal. And because a lot of this discrimination happens a level you don't have access (publishers, marketting, book stores) the only thing you can do to fight against it is a form of positive discrimination as customer and member of the SFF fandom.

Not so -- there are other ways. As it currently stands, the effect of all of these things on me (publishers, marketing, bookstores) is fairly negligible or at the very least second or third order.

[mormont]

Just a quick response to Rhaegon:

I suppose the answers were not clear and unambiguous then.

I'll boil it down to one question. Should the race of an author be a factor in choosing whether or not to buy or read a book, and let's say it is a fantasy book in this case?

Well, let's see.

I'm not saying you should go out and buy books by a black author purely and solely because he/she is black. I'm saying two things: one, knowledge of the author's background adds to the experience of reading his/her work: two, a failure to even be curious about the background of authors you read is not a neutral action but amounts to an acceptance of the status quo.

What I have not done is tell people what they ought to do if these things are true. People are, frankly, filling that bit in themselves, drawing their own conclusions and then reacting to those. Well, that's not quite true: I have suggested that it's worth reflecting on the issue.

But frankly, people are far too busy establishing their unimpeachable credentials as prejudice-free robots who never even stop to think about race to notice that the only thing I have suggested they do is just that: stop to think. What you do after that is up to you.

After all, as I've already said, I'm not vain enough to think I've got the answer to the equality/diversity problem, which has challenged better men than I. But I do know that the one thing that encourages prejudice more than anything else is an unquestioning acceptance of one's own attitudes as 'right'.

Now, if you found that unclear or ambiguous, I'm going to say (rarely for me) that it is not my fault. Perhaps you find it so because you confused it with the answer you were expecting.

[salinea]

How does a book suffer from discrimination? I mostly read books based on what is recommended here and elsewhere over the internet. I don't know most of the people doing the recommending so can never really be sure, but they don't sound biased.

I think Durham did a much better and much more informed round up of ways the discrimination happens already than I could do, so I would suggest you going back to read those if you don't remember them.

You said you were in France currently. Is it in Paris? If so we have access to the same book stores right now (if not, I don't think you have access to many book stores in English apart from Amazon so point is moot ^^). Indeed there is no African American shelf in any of those book stores that i can remember but that doesn't mean that Black writers are well represented in any case. As a matter of fact I don't remember having seen any of Durham books in those shelves. Nor have I seen Butler's (I did read on of her book in translation however), nor do I remember seeing Delany's. (I do see his in translation pretty often too). Have you?

People's knowledge of books in order to reccing them, here and elsewhere, is dependent of the books they know, the books they've read. This is dependant to the books they have access, the books which have any modicum of advertisement, the book's presentation in cover, etc., the decision about which collection to publish it to, the distribution of the book to different stores, etc. etc.

That's plenty of levels where discrimination may happen before it even hit the readership but which will have an impact on the readership nonewithstanding.

I do not assume anything of the sort. If I judge the book to be interesting, this discussion does not occur. The reason I spoke of it as less interesting is because that was the starting premise -- that instead of books I was going to read, I go for more diverse ones.

It's more about adding one factor to the factors by which you pick the books you were going to read. Not only the pretty cover/cool title, the interesting summary, the I-know-the-writer's-good and the I-heard-that-guy-say-that-book-is-good. Adding diversity to those, not replacing them.

There are limits to how far out of my way I'm willing to go for entertainment and it is really difficult to tell which of the out-of-the-way books are good.

I really don't think what's being asked is such an extremely excrutiating thing to do. Buy a potentially interestin book every now and then that's a bit out of the way because the writer is Black (or South Asian, or gay, or South American). Is it that difficult?

I do not know unless I decide to read both books. However, there have been times when I have done so and I am speaking based on that experience.

Okay, thank you, that hadn't been clear to me. Bad experiences, then? Can you talk about them? (I'm curious).

Not so -- there are other ways. As it currently stands, the effect of all of these things on me (publishers, marketing, bookstores) is fairly negligible or at the very least second or third order.

This is a global economy. If you read books in english, you're affected. Sorry. Also, even out of the United States, even if racism an discrimination doesn't work the same and even if race doesn't have the same politics, there's always some amount of racism which is, also, based on skin colour. I'm just as annoyed by Americano-centrism as you are, but I think you have to be very naive to believe that skin colour doesn't affect the racism against certain immigrants in Europe. I know at least in France it's definitly a factor.