Last Thursday, October 26th, was not a good day for AAR. By the day’s end, many on Twitter—romance authors among them—had tweeted and retweeted accusations that AAR and its readers are racist, sexist, and ablest.
The stated reason for this outpouring of loathing for AAR was the [email protected] column we ran on Friday, October 18th, which asked “Does historical romance have a quality problem?” In response, readers/commenters suggested that historical romance is suffering from the use of tired tropes and stale prose. Others decried the lack of accuracy from titles to terminology, and that HR had become too message-y. Many bemoaned the plethora of dukes and earls. Readers argued with one another and name checked authors they thought did the genre well and those they felt, at times, did not.
At some point, almost a week after it went up, the column and its responses caught the eye of someone on Twitter who was offended by both the question and the comments. This individual posted about the blog and the anger quickly spread like wildfire on social media. This fury seems to be about two different things.
First, there are many on Twitter who found the comments readers posted offensive and who believed it was AAR’s job—I think that means mostly me, the publisher, but it may also mean reviewers who posted on the thread—to either (and I’m not sure about this) not publish those comments or to reprimand the posters of those comments. Second, there were a few comments I didn’t publish because they involved personal attacks. (“You are disgusting,” read two. Another accused all on the thread of only wishing to read “super white and right” books.) Those Twitterers upset at AAR called that censorship.
Were some of the comments offensive? Well, they did offend others. Does that mean they shouldn’t be published or that they should have been argued against by me or other AAR staff? I don’t think so.
The [email protected] is a question we post each Friday. We started this for two reasons. One, we’re publishing so many reviews and blogs—552 reviews and 68 blogs thus far this year—we think our readers are hearing A LOT from us and we’d like to hear more from them. Second, we are committed to creating community and a weekly discussion seems like a good way to accomplish this. And that discussion is reader driven not staff/reviewer driven.
But wait, you say, isn’t AAR committed to an inclusive community? Yes. Yes, we are. And we feel that’s reflected in our reviews and in our Steals and Deals picks—in the content we create and curate.
Thus far in 2019, 15% of the books we’ve reviewed feature leads of color. 15% are by authors of color. 10% feature queer protagonists. In 2020, those numbers will increase.
According to an oft-cited 2018 study by The Ripped Bodice, 7.7% of romance books published by major houses are by authors of color. If you accept those numbers, that gives our number of 15% of our reviews by AoCs some context. We are nearly doubling the big names of the industry in terms of putting characters and authors of color before readers.
Additionally, some of our most popular blogs this year have been our AAR Loves lists. In these, AAR reviewers recommend books we love. Here’s what a few of our AAR loves lists look like in terms of inclusion:
Marriages in trouble: 19% by authors of color 19% non-hetero characters
Disability: 14% by authors of color 31% non-hetero characters
Seasoned romances: 20% by authors of color, 25% non-hetero characters
Musicians: 21% by authors of color, 25% non-hetero characters
Again, is it enough? Of course not. The obstacles to authors of color and to non-heteronormative stories are such that it will take more than any blog to turn the ship. But we are trying to do our part.
Well, OK, you say, but some of the comments made people of color feel erased. That’s a harder thing to deal with. I hate—HATE—that anyone who read the comments at AAR felt personally invalidated. But, as the publisher of a daily blog, I believe it is important to listen to the speech of others until that speech crosses the line into direct personal attacks. I also believe that having difficult conversations makes us more likely to better understand those with whom we disagree.
As for the accusations of censorship—I ultimately published all but the aforementioned comments—it’s clear to me I haven’t done a good job of stating what the rules are for commenting at AAR and that’s on me. I will not publish personal attacks but I haven’t stated that and I will this week.
Many of the people on Twitter who were part of this discussion and who believe AAR and its readers are racist believe this, in part, because of the tweets of Tessa Dare and other romance authors–several of whom were criticized in the thread and many whom we have reviewed.
On Thursday and Friday, Tessa took AAR and its readers—I’m assuming she meant the readers in the comments although other tweets seem to encompass AAR and its readers writ large—to task for being racist. Tessa has 35K followers so many people saw her tweets and retweeted them. Authors, other bloggers, and readers retweeted the Tweets stating AAR is racist and exclusionary—AAR’s missteps around our Readers Top 100 Romances poll were mentioned many times but so were things that are simply false. Many tweeted that we should be shut down, ignored, and shunned. Tessa suggested that authors deny us ARCs (advanced review copies).
I’m not interested in getting in a battle on Twitter–has anyone ever “won” one there? Nor do I wish to attack anyone, including Tessa Dare. But I will defend AAR, its staff, and its readers. I am fine with being personally attacked. I write the [email protected] column, I am the publisher, nothing is published at AAR that I don’t OK. I am not happy however with authors attacking our readers or the AAR staff.
Who are AAR’s readers? They come from all over the world and they come to AAR because they love romance. If you read the comments they make at AAR, they are overwhelmingly measured, interested in better understanding the genre and its concerns. Do people occasionally say things that give me pause? Sure. But romance itself is a narrative of overcoming differences and finding connection. It routinely champions forgiveness and redemption. To be all about romance is to be here for all of you, those whose beliefs I share and those I don’t. I ask you to be kind but honest, true to yourselves but open to the perceptions of others. We can do this.
And the staff? AAR reviewers and staff are diverse. We are women of color, white women, straight women, queer women, married women, divorced women, widowed women, and disabled women. Few of us are wealthy and several of us live paycheck to paycheck. Almost all of us work. Some of us are parents and some are not. We live in Canada, in Europe, and in the US. Some of us are religious, others are not. The one thing we all are is willing, week in and week out, to share our love of reading romance without any compensation other than review books.
Lastly, this has felt to me like an argument that mostly white people are having about mostly people of color. That’s not where I want to spend my time. I’d rather spend my energy supporting those who feel excluded. If you are an author of color and you would like your book considered for review at AAR, please email me a blurb at [email protected] If you are a reader of color and you have suggestions on how I can make AAR a more inclusive welcoming place, please email me the suggestions or put them in the comments below. If you identify as part of any marginalized group, I ask the same things of you too.
Thanks,
Dabney Grinnan
Publisher at AAR
Good on you, Dabney. I look at various other romance sites but always come back to AAR. I will always carefully consider what others have to say but my reading choices are mine alone and if they offend others that’s their problem and not mine. AAR is a wonderful tool and I appreciate that your presentation and choices always seem fair and don’t have an agenda. If I don’t feel attracted to a story with LGBTQ+ characters, for example, it’s not because AAR dissed, recommended or exalted it but because it was my decision which I am freely allowed to make. I am a white, educated, middle class woman and just turned 70. But I believe that it matters no more than being a WoC, aged 25, poor and unemployed because we are at AAR because we like romantic fiction and not because we feel compelled to criticise others’ choices, change the world to conform to our personal POV or apologise for who and what we are. Thank you again for all that you and your team do and long may you do it. With best wishes always!!
I think it takes a lot of guts to create and maintain a place where people can be so open about their opinions. Freedom of expression is, to me, a fundamental right of humanity. I only think we need to have a care about how we speak to and about others.
I made my comments on why AAR is good for me, how much I learn and how much I expand into reading and learning about PoC, different sexual orientation, etc., on the last blog. I appreciate this romance book review community that seems to struggle with a rapidly changing world and tries to learn about it – and this is how AAR feels to me. A journey we do, not a perfect goal achieved. Good books, fun and a feel good time with books are at the core of AAR’s mission. This core is done in a way that I see as soft change, as showing not preaching, as showcasing good books, from many diverse people, and offering many diverse stories, AAR is consciously looking for good books outside a narrow margin of traditional romance. I like that, I support that. I am grateful that Dabney and the reviewers offer their spare time to give us this service. Thank you AAR, you are an important treasure for me, my reading life is different because you exist. I am not sure what I should repeat here. Most of what I said in that last blog I would wish to repeat. It took courage to write those comments, and I appreciate that some people took the time to react positively to my post – it is important to be reassured if putting myself out there. I hope we can do that for each other, no matter if we agree or disagree. I admire you all who are commenting, and I am sad and frightened at how hard it has become to have a dialogue. I honestly feel helpless, in the face of all this communication difficulties, and anger and personal attacks. I try to reflect, I try to learn, I try to understand, I try to “walk in another’s shoes”. As best I can. And yes, the last two – three- five years have been a steep learning curve, because I am a middle aged white woman living in a country in Europe in which we are nearly all white. So I try. I probably fail regularly. One of the reasons why I fail: More and more, I am becoming frightened of even asking any questions I may have, or mentioning my lack of understanding for a problem that I have never had. Defensive? probably, it is hard not to feel defensive when experiencing strong emotions towards me. I get that I am privileged – but how specifically, what I should do about it, and how to be sensitive, and what is right and wrong, and how to look from another side – if I cannot ask, I cannot learn. If the reaction is “I should have known already”, well, I hated that one as a small child – well, I do not know, and I honestly want to learn, to understand, to find a fair and inclusive way forward. And I feel that this seriously compromised if my lack of knowledge, my lack of sensitivity, my lack of understanding is already the reason for anger. Then I will be silent. And not learn. I hope that AAR will not be silent, its slow but steady development to being more inclusive, and towards offering me diverse good books is a treasure for me. I would not read so many diverse books if I did not get recommendations here, from people I trust. I want to live in a world where we all have a good and fair place, which cannot happen if I cannot come to the table from where I am today. I am a thinking being, I need to understand, to learn. That is a vulnerable space. I certainly have habits of thought that are not right, and I need to change them. I do my best, but unfortunately, I need the forbearance of those who are in a worse place, otherwise I will not be able to leave my “privileged” mental space. To help me, I compare this to being a woman in a man’s world. Which I always was, and still am. I need(ed) to be patient with men who were willing but did not know, and harsh with men who did not want to know. And the balance was always difficult. and exhausting. And sometimes, I felt that I was bringing hurt on myself, because I continued to try and discern, instead of just walking away and/or attacking. And often, I only knew looking back if I… Read more »
Very well said.
Lovely post, Lieselotte. Everyone needs to draw breath and relax a bit. Consideration and kindness on ALL sides will permit learning, acceptance and enjoyment of what we celebrate here: romantic fiction.
Lieselotte, I’m a white woman myself and I have one recommendation for you: In order to not place the burden of explaining (probably over and over again) on marginalized people by asking them (potentially) insensitive questions, there is one very valuable thing you can do, and that’s listening. And I mean exactly that. There was a good thread on Twitter a while ago (it can be a very informative place if you curate it) that recommended simply following members of marginalized communities on Twitter and reading their tweets. Not badgering them with questions, not demanding explanations, just reading. LISTENING.
You will learn so much this way, I promise. Without ever having to ask a question, without taking up even more space than we already do. That doesn’t mean you should never ask a question, but maybe try to ask yourself first: Can I google that? Are there personal essays/articles/books by people that I can read to educate myself? There is a WEALTH of information out there.
So just listen. Read. Retweet, recommend, and amplify the voices of marginalized authors (and readers) without centering yourself in the conversation.
That’s of course not the be-all and end-all of all advice (I am still learning myself and making mistakes), but it is a starting point.
You say that having a dialogue has become hard – I disagree. The problem is that the “white voice” side of the dialogue is far too loud, far too ignorant and often really hurtful (I am not excluding myself from that). The solution isn’t to get upset when someone calls you out for a problematic (and again, probably hurtful) comment or stance – the solution is to not be so aggressively loud. Lower your voice. Listen. Because the anger is entirely justified.
And please look up intersectionality – comparing this situation to “being a woman in a man’s world” is really not appropriate.
Thank you for posting this! Intersectionality is the perfect term needed for these debates and so missing here!
Louise said: “The problem is that the “white voice” side of the dialogue is far too loud, far too ignorant and often really hurtful (I am not excluding myself from that). The solution isn’t to get upset when someone calls you out for a problematic (and again, probably hurtful) comment or stance – the solution is to not be so aggressively loud. Lower your voice. Listen. Because the anger is entirely justified.”
I am afraid I can’t accept criticism of any voice, be it white, black, blue or purple simply based on the criteria of the “colour” of that voice. We are all entitled voice an opinion as long as it’s courteous and considered. It now seems that there is an expectation that we self-monitor lest we offend anyone who identifies as marginalised or a victim. And who defines either marginal or victim for there are surely many variations of meaning? And if a person self-defines in this way does it perpetuate an argument that modern (and I assume we may mean) western society is so awful that the concept of equality is simply impossible in the next thousand years or until a certain cadre die off? I find that sad. If I hadn’t identified myself as white, educated and middle class in an earlier post, how would (or should) anyone know exactly who or what I am? I find it really hard to understand disparagement of anyone’s colour including mine. It really does not matter to me what colour anyone is and, I expect, neither does it to 99.9% of those who visit AAR. Personally I enjoy coming here for reasons I have stated elsewhere and not to enrol in Sociology 101. And I don’t wish to be judgmental here but for me Twitter (and most social media) is about the last place I would look for fact or rational discourse on pretty much anything.
Thanks elaine s, I see that part of it as well. The risk of silencing anyone who is engaging from wherever they happen to be, courteously.
However, I hear Louise and many others and prefer to stop now.
I do not wish to show myself on these topics, anymore.
Causing pain and anger is not my goal.
Neither to others, nor to myself.
Apologies to all.
Thanks, Louise.
Yes, I hear you. Appreciate you taking the time to give a thoughtful answer.
Thanks for the support. Another way AAR is promoting diverse romance is through our Amazon storefront. This list, which we add to weekly, is full of diverse reads AAR loves.
Thank you AAR, for allowing discussions and protecting freedom of speech when it is threatened on all sides. This is why I have started trying to comment here, when I am still too afraid to comment on other romance sites.
This culture of enforcing a single, rigid, extremely narrow “right” set of values and ideas is frightening to me. We lose all critical thinking, instead we must toe the party line or risk being piled on on twitter, silenced and “cancelled”. I don’t know how this can be seen as progress, when we are losing the ability to think for ourselves, to choose our values because we truly believe in them and not because we are told that they are the only virtuous and acceptable ones.
I will continue to stay away from the toxic culture on twitter. This also reaffirms my decision to never follow author social media, and stick to newsletters only. Knowing the petty behaviour of authors would ruin their books for me. I’d rather not know anything about an author and enjoy their books.
I’ve been coming to AAR for over 10 years, although mostly as a lurker than a poster. Aside from the honest reviews, I especially enjoy reading readers interactions with each other on the message boards or comments section. It is, by far, the most restrained, honest, yet respectful online discussions I’ve seen, and the main reason why I keep coming back to AAR daily. I suspect the moderator of this board has a lot to do with ensuring these online discussions from easily going downhill.
Reading is a personal taste, and one shouldn’t be shamed for liking or disliking a book. It also can’t be faked: you either connect with a book, or you don’t, and no amount of shaming or peer pressure can change that.
The trend to shun or ban something or someone for voicing something unpopular is deeply childish. How are we going to learn from one another if everyone must conform to ‘approved’ opinions?
I feel so exasperated by this but in today’s climate I suppose it was only a matter of time before you came on to the radar. I seem to remember reading years ago that Tessa Dare and Courtney Milan are very good friends. Given some comments were made about Courtney in the discussion I have to wonder if that motivated Tessa’s outburst.
You must be feeling completely miserable about all this. Take heart from this quote from an article by Canon Dr Giles Fraser writing about another contentious vote about Brexit. He was defending the Labour MP Lisa Nandy.
“shouting … from the side lines , condemning those who are tasked with the sort of moral decision making from which most of us are spared – that is one of the most spectacular forms of self-righteousness you can imagine, and built on the luxury position of not having to face the fact that the world is a much more complicated place than we would like it to be.
Twitter is the home of cost-free wisdom…it is a place where people parade their own innocence. Ignore the lot of them. You did good, even if I know it probably doesn’t feel that way…”
I wish you all the very best – this will pass – and keep up the good work.
The mean and hateful comments are so sad to me. I love AAR and appreciate the hard work these reviewers are doing for FREE. I have found so many wonderful books here. I must admit that I usually don’t know whether the author is a PoC, identifies as LGBTQ or what their political or religious views are. It really doesn’t matter to me as long as the writing is good and story makes me feel. I read and enjoy almost every genre as long as there is an HEA.
If anyone thinks they can do better, then they need to volunteer to help this wonderful staff. Give your time and genius to broaden the range of books reviewed, so we can all support books we may not hear about otherwise.
Again, please try to remember these reviewers do this for NOTHING but the enjoyment they get from reading and sharing with others what they thought about the book. Don’t put the burden on them to include what you want to read about, and by whom. Join them and others will learn and grow from your great recommendations and positive voice on new books and new authors about all kinds of romance.
Wow, had no idea about the Twitter backlash…
TBH, I’m confused.
AAR posed the question “Does Historical Romance have a quality problem?” Then you allowed readers to respond, as usual.
Tons of folks posted their thoughts, mostly agreeing that HR does have a problem. Lots of issues were mentioned.
Along the way, as might be expected, some posters disagreed with other posters about whether something was an issue, what could/should be done to fix said issue, and so on. Some posters also said that AAR wasn’t doing a good enough job advocating/supporting diversity in the romance genre, and that this counted as an issue.
It was interesting to see so many diverse points of view and the reasoning behind them. Very educational and enlightening. (I happen to think that’s a good thing.)
But now that I’ve looked at some of the Twitter stuff from Tessa Dare and others…. the ranting/attacks actually confused me.
Are these folks saying that AAR should have “curated” the free-for-all discussion? And perhaps removed all posts that did not past 2019 SJW muster?
Or are they saying that the question should not have been asked in the first place, because everyone was allowed to respond, and only certain social/demographic groups should have been accorded that right?
Or are they saying something else?
I don’t mean to be dense, but I’m actually baffled about what the problem is that Dare and others are having with the original post here on AAR.
Could it really be that the “problem” is that AAR allows diversity of opinion when it’s readers post?
What am I missing?
I think some people were advocating a boycott of AAR. But, I think many instead were speculating on the silence and lack of response around racially insensitive posts. The more egregious posts were copied and pasted on Twitter and sat there for thousands of people to view, I thought it was problematic that when I went back to the AAR forum, few if any readers were challenging them. In that context, it did look like this is a site filled with as Dabney said, “mostly white people.” I don’t think it’s necessarily reviewers’ job to censor prejudiced ideas, but the absence of readers responding in culturally sensitive ways troubles me and does give me pause to be here anymore.
Blackjack, thanks for that response, I appreciate the clarification.
I understand your comment, but why didn’t the readers on Twitter who were concerned about the comments come to the blog where they were actually made and respond to them? Wouldn’t that be more productive than just posting on Twitter where some of the people you disagree with might not be … or even if they were on Twitter, are not always going to see the comments? (Frankly, even though I frequently visit AAR, I don’t read all of the blog posts and their attending comments. I’m here for the book reviews and the wonky message board with the challenges thread, before it disappeared. ;-) So, this whole discussion went right past me until I stumbled across some tweets on Twitter, but *not* the original tweet.)
I agree, Sandlynn. I wish those who feel hurt and frustrated with AAR reader comments would post here, but maybe for many, it feels like entering enemy territory. Contrary to some of the views expressed here, I found many of the Twitter comments illuminating. Romance author Alexis Daria posted on her account. “intersectionality is not a checklist,” and that was starkly stated and powerful. Courtney Milan posted all of the normative categories that are taken for granted and never even considered a “checklist,” such as “white, heterosexual, able-bodied, cis” etc. I suspect authors though are not keen to dispute with readership, especially readers who express ideas that oppose their own creative works.
What checklist? Did anyone post a checklist?
The word “Checklist,” which is why I put it in quotes, is a term used by some of the commenters who argued that writers today have a checklist or quota of diverse categories they include in their books to “virtue signal.”
I’ve been here on and off since the early 00’s. I’m also a POC and I’ve never felt marginalized or offended here. I come here for the well thought out reviews and I can’t even tell you how many authors I’ve found through this site. I’ve actually stopped frequenting other blogs because of how strident they’ve become. Keep up the good work.
That’s nice to hear. Thank you.
Dare called out AAR and AAR answered. Daria’s books get great press here just like most of Milan’s.
There’s the missing key that no one’s mentioning – most romances by #ownvoices authors and featuring diverse protagonists reviewed here have gotten a B or higher.
The exceptions have been few and far between which is normal in the reviewing field because no author will be letter perfect in every single book they release.
Yes, that irony hasn’t escaped me.
Twitter is full of angry people looking for something to shout about. I rarely go there these days.
That thread was right. And I rarely go anywhere else for informed reviews. Amazon is useless, the system is broken, so this is the most reliable source for me. I don’t always agree with you, but you always give reasons for it, and so I can make my own judgment. Keep on trucking!
I read the entire original post and all the comment threads (and posted a couple of comments myself), and while there were a couple of comments (I’ll refrain from naming names) that caused me to raise my eyebrows, I found nothing overtly racist (or any other kind of negative *ist). I’m baffled as to Dare’s response. Where is her anger coming from? Where is she reading the racist content? Perhaps she didn’t like specific comments about her books or those of Courtney Milan, but not liking someone’s work is not the same as racism. I’m completely gobsmacked by her reaction. Every day that passes makes me happy I’m not on social media, especially Twitter.
Hello, DiscoDollyDeb. I think a lot of the anger was directed at me for one of my comments. Ms. Dare made a screen capture here: https://twitter.com/TessaDare/status/1187468666981404673.
I won’t rehash the kerfuffle here, as I have made several elaborations/clarifications/explanations of my controversial post both on this thread and the quality of HR one.
Incidentally, my far more innocuous comments are no longer being accepted at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. They simply don’t appear. So I’m wondering if they’re blocking me because of what went down at AAR. I wasn’t given a warning or explanation, but that is their decision, of course. I’m just glad AAR hasn’t thrown me out on my ear yet.
Oh my. If SBTB is blocking you there because of AAR, I am so sorry. I respect their right to limit who can or can’t interact with their site of course. Let me tell you, you are in no danger of being thrown out here. I don’t think we’ve ever, in my tenure, with AAR, blocked anyone. We reserve the right to limit comments when they cross a line (We are working on clear comment rules this week, FYI.) but we’ve never kicked anyone off AAR and I hope we never will.
Thank you for your kind words, Ms. Grinnan. I can’t say for certain if that is the reason my posts are disappearing or just never showing up at all. At this point, I only suspect. I sincerely hope it is an oversight like some glitch in the program, because Christina Dalcher, the author of “Vox,” (the book we were discussing when my comment disappeared), replied to my comment which disappeared before I had a chance to read and reply. So frustrating! I am saddened if I am really being blocked there though, because I had some good times with a lot of up votes and follow-up comments. And like AAR, I’ve found good book recs there and offered a few of my own. So disappointing!
Let’s hope it’s just a glitch!
You should also get a note that your comment is awaiting moderation as all comments there autopublish.
Good news, everyone. It turned out to be a glitch like I thought. Yes, my comment about AAR was intentionally removed because SBTB didn’t want to be involved in that kerfuffle (and I don’t blame them!), but it was my link that turned out to be the issue. (I don’t have a website for my books, so I linked to Amazon. Apparently, the auto spam filters didn’t like that.) So I’m back in business commenting on SBTB, and they were very kind about it. I just wanted to let you know that the issue is resolved with (hopefully!) no hard feelings from anyone about it.
I am happy to hear that. I couldn’t imagine SBTB being so petty.
Try using a new nick and see what happens Nan De Plume, Sounds like it might be a glitch. There are dissenting voices being published on the Bound in Flame review, for instance, so if they’re persona non grataing you should confront them.
Hi, CuriousCat. I tried posting comments on other posts, but the same thing happened. My comment simply doesn’t register. In the past I have gotten the “comment is awaiting review” message, but not this time. And I have never had a comment rejected before. I have written to Sarah on the contact form, so we’ll see what happens
And oh, a new nickname? I haven’t tried that, but I think the comments would be linked to my e-mail anyhow.
Again, if you want to help, help by reading and buying works by diverse authors. As I said, we’ve reviewed lots and over a third of the ones we’ve reviewed in 2019 are DIKs! Here’s a link to books we’ve tagged as by authors of color.
Hi, AAR. Since you so kindly asked that any members of marginalized groups put their suggestions in the comments, here is mine.
I was deeply hurt by your choice to platform Kristan Higgins during the “Good Luck with that” **controversy.** That book was extremely damaging and caused one of the most violent and terrible relapses I’ve ever had on my bulimia. As a fat woman who struggled with these issues all my life, to see you, a website that I trusted, basically giving her a pat on the back for something so harmful, after people had said it was harmful and explained why…that fundamentally broke the trust and faith I had in you. I could no longer choose to believe that you had your readers’ best interests at heart.
This is just an example of my own personal experience based on my own marginalizations. My suggestion is that if you want people to feel included and recognized and supported and acknowledged on your site…maybe don’t platform people who are harmful and have done harm. This includes authors, reviewers, bloggers and, yes, even your own commenters.
Just my two cents.
Signed,
A disappointed former fan.
Thank you for your feedback. I know that book made many unhappy. (For readers curious what we’re discussing here, it is an interview I did with Kristan Higgins about her book Good Luck with That.) Anne, I am sorry our work was damaging to you. That book hit many in many different ways and I pushed Kristan to talk about the controversial choices she made.
I was browsing another site a couple of days ago, and I came across a review of a historical with a heroine of color, set in an Asian country. The reviewer said although she enjoyed the book in general, at one point, she found it difficult to understand the heroine’s reasons for doing something. But she (the reviewer) also felt her lack of connection with the heroine in this aspect was influenced by her Western perspective.
One of the comments from a reader was that this indicated white supremacy.
To me, the review was respectful and balanced. At no point did it ever, IMO, suggest a Western perspective was superior to an Asian one. However, it didn’t show the reviewer in complete harmony with a heroine of color, nor did the reviewer consider the book perfect, so that might have been a problem for the reader.
Reading that, as well as reading comments here, has made me wary of reviewing diverse books (though since I was born in Sri Lanka and grew up in the Middle East, it might be an interesting experience to be accused of being a white supremacist). I also feel that if criticism is equated with racism, and if accusations of racism are allowed to fly freely, it shuts down balanced discourse.
I’ll still read any book that catches my eye, but I’d prefer to review books where I’m not at risk of being attacked or name-called for doing so.
“I also feel that if criticism is equated with racism, and if accusations of racism are allowed to fly freely, it shuts down balanced discourse.” Perfectly stated.
“though since I was born in Sri Lanka and grew up in the Middle East, it might be an interesting experience to be accused of being a white supremacist.” Sadly, I think the term “white supremacist” is often used today as a general ad hominem attack rather than a gateway into a productive conversation. I’ve read a lot of comments on the internet in general that can easily be described as, “You disagree with me on (insert issue). You must be a white supremacist!” And on the internet where people can remain somewhat hidden, I have seen examples of people calling others “white supremacists-” when the person in question isn’t even remotely white. Which begs the question, should the validity of a person’s arguments be based on the color of their skin or any other rubric besides the content of the argument itself? (And with that question, I can feel the next firestorm coming.)
People of color can support and endorse white supremacy — just read Toni Morrison incredible novels, such as The Bluest Eye, if you have doubts. Likewise, women can align themselves with patriarchy. For instance, my mother believed women were subservient to men and that my father deserved to be head of the household because he was a man. She endorsed patriarchy and was perplexed when her daughters identified as feminists. These are ideological issues rather than “essentialist” ones, meaning that biology does not determine or determine alone our responses to our world. White people can endorse anti-racism, or white people can endorse racism, though all white people benefit from the privileges of whiteness. There are lots of reading materials out there on critical race and gender studies that distinguish among these ideas. But in short, to say that someone is a person of color and therefore cannot possibly advocate racist beliefs is inaccurate.
Thank you, Nan! I agree, certain accusations are just used as attacks. It’s got to the point where they don’t register with me because they’re disrespectful, inaccurate and usually contain misinterpretations, so the best thing to do is allow people their say but not engage with them or try to have a discussion.
I’ve been reading AAR for year, since I was a teenager and I tend to stay away from your forums because they are an echo chamber that reflect a very specific demographic. And if I could, as a response to this post, I would post that Principal Skinner meme from the Simpsons. “Am I out of touch? — No, it’s the children who are wrong”. Labeling the problem as “Twitter” without engaging with the substantive arguments that were made feels like patting yourself on the back. Especially when some of the writers you claim as “the good ones” in that mess of HR, state that you are wrong. People can read. They can look at the chain of comments (like I did) feel disgusted by them (like I did) and walk away and/or engage with them in a public manner.
A question: why did you not change the echo chamber instead of standing outside of it? You can’t fix a demographic problem unless you speak up.
I have the skill to go into a long history of the term emotional labor and the toll it takes on black women (and FYI, I am a black woman) but I am going to reply by simply saying, “It is not my job to “fix demographic problems”. I am not a demographic. I don’t get paid to police forums that are not for me and are unwelcome to me. I stay in and inhabit places that are welcoming to me and mine” and keep it moving.
And I’m Jewish, Latina and Bi. Nice to meet you. Want me to talk about the emotional toll the romance community has taken on me even in places deemed ‘safe’? Because I could. I’m not a demographic either but isn’t it funny how this situation has reduced us to nothing but. Sad, too.
SJC: Thank you for saying that. I agree 100%
I’ve been reading your reviews pretty much as long as I’ve been reading romance and have always found it a balanced resource for finding new books. Of course I don’t always agree with your reviewers, but if I were reviewing, no one would always agree with me because tastes differ. I don’t know of a site that is as balanced and thorough as this one.
As for Twitter — to be honest, I don’t know why anyone pays any attention to the ranters there.