I’ve been thinking about these things for a while and have formed a different opinion. I think, as a person of colour, a woman, a minority also by religion as well, there’s something that has still really bothered me about the wave of bringing in more “diverse” books. My question first centers around what is the actual definition of “diversity” in American and Canadian publishing. It seems as if, by example, that definition is anything written by authors who are not white, with authors who identify as BIPOC being at the pinnacle. I completely understand this in terms of seeing a greater number of voices and characters being represented in books, which for so long was not the case. The part where I started to take pause and still do is that the diversity in books seems to be largely about VISUAL representation and NOT about actual diversity. Because to actually represent diversity this has to move beyond skin colour and it is diversity of thought that also has to be represented ALONG WITH visual diversity. So, for example, what about a book about a black kid who doesn’t support Black Lives Matter? Or a black academic who doesn’t support anti-racist rhetoric? And before anyone freaks out over me saying this…I’m not commenting on whether or not people who don’t support these causes/rhetorics are good or bad. The fact is, there are very smart blank people, women, people of colour, who have different views who are not represented in publishing because most of publishing doesn’t agree with their views. The point is, true diversity means publishing the views of people who we don’t agree with. And I think THIS is where the backlash for anything comes from. The fact is not everyone (even within BIPOC AND POC) agrees that racism/patriarchy should be discussed/dealt with/healed the same way. Not everyone agrees with second-wave feminism (and to be clear I’m not saying I don’t). But if we shut out these voices and call them racist, misogynists, or “self-hating” as BIPOC and POC that aren’t on the “left” are actually called, then there’s nothing truly diverse about what we’re publishing. It’s just farce, and also racist in its own right because it supports a view that all BIPOC and POC have the same views and think the same thing and aren’t actually people with a diversity of views among them. To me, this is the real “backlash” publishing is facing right now. Because there’s a lot of us who feel the diversity wave of 2020 was a show from the start. I think that a lot of people who didn’t see that then may be the ones who feel that the backlash is nothing more than a fight for the status quo now.
Thanks for your perspective, Candice. I think I agree with you, it's complicated. Representation is just representation by the non-majority. When we talk about parity in publishing, that would mean, playing a numbers game, 50% white, 50% non-white/50% straight, 50% not straight. This is not even close to where we are or probably ever will be. I have seen lots of books by non-white writers that are just books about experiences that don't center race, but many writers of color, especially Black writers, share that they feel PUSHED to write about race. So that basically that's all they can write about. You have to have non-white editors in the room, and/or allies who understand that our experiences are vast, and we don't need to be boiled down to our singular identities. But we're not there, and when editors are fired when they're trying to promote change, I think we stay right where we are—which is in this crazy paradigm of just boxing everyone in based on their identities. This needs to change. And this is where I think we're saying the same thing. But I think the backlash is coming from people in power, and those are the same people who always hold the power. It is born of a hierarchical system.
Thanks for your response. I hear you and see where we’re in agreement. I guess my question is, when you say that the backlash is coming from people in power (hence the firing) my guess (and in saying this I’m admitting it’s a guess) is that the people in power would argue (as you mentioned in your piece) that at least part of the reason for their “backlash” comes from a lack of sales (or a lack of earning out an advance) etc. And part of the point I’m trying to make is that perhaps some of the reason that sales for diverse authors aren’t where these people of power think they should be is because a lot of buyers (regular people) can see through this diversity push and despite the voices being represented still don’t feel their’s are. In other words, this is where the “anti-woke” is coming in because the authors who are being published or so largely a part of this rhetoric that people have heard it all now and don’t want to buy it anymore. It’s absolutely complicated. I think that’s why I’m not convinced of the backlash argument entirely. There’s always going to be an opposing voice that is sometimes louder and other times not. What’s going on here (to me) is also much more complicated.
That's a very interesting point/thesis, Candice. You're giving me food for thought... I have to wonder if Lisa Lucas was trying to do exactly what you're saying—pushing for a bigger more holistic approach. I had this exact thought, like she was trying to "diversify" (buzzword) by doing the approach you're saying, to have writers be writers and not boxed in. But that's all speculation. And agreed it's complicated. I appreciate this because I'm going to chew on it!!
Thanks for your comment and perhaps you could be right about Lisa Lucas? I think that Africa Brooke is an amazing voice in this conversation. I haven’t read her new book yet but her discussions around what diversity really is (as opposed to how it’s being represented) was real fuel for what I was feeling but couldn’t put words to.
I don't think this fits the bill of backlash. Unfortunately it's just straight-up run-of-the-mill antisemitism rearing its head. I only say this because I don't think that Jews fit the profile of being held back when they're on the brink of progress. I think they fit the profile of being scapegoated and blamed for everything at various inflection points in history. But I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. I read this and I'm glad James Kirchick wrote the piece. Good that the NYT gave him space to do it bc a lot of people have been saying the media (NYT specifically) has been too silent.
Having left the world of trad publishing years ago, I had no idea that this kind of backlash was going on. Backlash is, of course, evident in many aspects of our current society; I wrote about one of these aspects in a recent post (https://robinreardonwrites.substack.com/p/is-america-immature-and-paranoid).
I’ve wondered how strong the correlation is between anti-progress and paranoia. To those of us who live in the U.S., it’s easy to see it as more prevalent here. But as I glance around the globe, I see far-right politics (which is usually where we find the resistance to progress) either gaining ground or at least gaining footholds in many, many other countries.
I hope that when we see pushback against progress, it’s because we’ve made just that: progress. Though it does seem slow. And it can be profoundly frustrating.
Thanks for sharing this, and yes, backlash is lurking wherever there is progress. This argument that we are in this horrible political moment because we got the eight years of Obama, for instance, is a hard one to grapple with. That forces lie waiting... We think we're making progress, and then we have to pay for it.
As a historical writer, I tend to look at history and backlashes happen with every "new thing." What was once far right has a response far left and eventually the pendulum swings back to the middle, with acceptance. Maybe I'm naive, but if we keep standing up for our beliefs, they will eventually become mainstream.
Brilliant, Brooke. Thanks for knitting these strands together. Thank you for using your experience not only to tell where we've been, but where we are going. Also, personally, I find this quote regarding Faludi--“backlashes rear up not when women have achieved equality but when they seem to be on the brink of achieving it"--on the nose on a period I'm writing about, immediately after World War II and women's mass entry into the work force in support of the war effort. All that progress made led to quite a backlash against the idea that We Can Do It.
I'm grateful to you for writing this. So much needs to be talked about as DEI seems to be disappearing all around us. On a completely different topic, but one you touch on -- the large advance, in my opinion, isn't worth it. I'd rather get a mediocre advance, earn out faster, and see the royalty checks come in. In my experience, it's worked that way and I'm grateful.
Thank you for writing this piece and providing more resources at the bottom for people to keep this conversation going. It’s also not lost on me that the industry referred to Lucas’ hiring as “splashy”…
Thank you for this post, Brooke. Here in Texas, we know all about "too much, too fast." Texas' anti-DEI, anti-woke law, enthusiastically signed by Gov. Abbot last year, prohibits any state-govt hiring and training “in reference to race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation.” Two steps forward, 1.75 steps back.
I’ve been thinking about these things for a while and have formed a different opinion. I think, as a person of colour, a woman, a minority also by religion as well, there’s something that has still really bothered me about the wave of bringing in more “diverse” books. My question first centers around what is the actual definition of “diversity” in American and Canadian publishing. It seems as if, by example, that definition is anything written by authors who are not white, with authors who identify as BIPOC being at the pinnacle. I completely understand this in terms of seeing a greater number of voices and characters being represented in books, which for so long was not the case. The part where I started to take pause and still do is that the diversity in books seems to be largely about VISUAL representation and NOT about actual diversity. Because to actually represent diversity this has to move beyond skin colour and it is diversity of thought that also has to be represented ALONG WITH visual diversity. So, for example, what about a book about a black kid who doesn’t support Black Lives Matter? Or a black academic who doesn’t support anti-racist rhetoric? And before anyone freaks out over me saying this…I’m not commenting on whether or not people who don’t support these causes/rhetorics are good or bad. The fact is, there are very smart blank people, women, people of colour, who have different views who are not represented in publishing because most of publishing doesn’t agree with their views. The point is, true diversity means publishing the views of people who we don’t agree with. And I think THIS is where the backlash for anything comes from. The fact is not everyone (even within BIPOC AND POC) agrees that racism/patriarchy should be discussed/dealt with/healed the same way. Not everyone agrees with second-wave feminism (and to be clear I’m not saying I don’t). But if we shut out these voices and call them racist, misogynists, or “self-hating” as BIPOC and POC that aren’t on the “left” are actually called, then there’s nothing truly diverse about what we’re publishing. It’s just farce, and also racist in its own right because it supports a view that all BIPOC and POC have the same views and think the same thing and aren’t actually people with a diversity of views among them. To me, this is the real “backlash” publishing is facing right now. Because there’s a lot of us who feel the diversity wave of 2020 was a show from the start. I think that a lot of people who didn’t see that then may be the ones who feel that the backlash is nothing more than a fight for the status quo now.
Thanks for your perspective, Candice. I think I agree with you, it's complicated. Representation is just representation by the non-majority. When we talk about parity in publishing, that would mean, playing a numbers game, 50% white, 50% non-white/50% straight, 50% not straight. This is not even close to where we are or probably ever will be. I have seen lots of books by non-white writers that are just books about experiences that don't center race, but many writers of color, especially Black writers, share that they feel PUSHED to write about race. So that basically that's all they can write about. You have to have non-white editors in the room, and/or allies who understand that our experiences are vast, and we don't need to be boiled down to our singular identities. But we're not there, and when editors are fired when they're trying to promote change, I think we stay right where we are—which is in this crazy paradigm of just boxing everyone in based on their identities. This needs to change. And this is where I think we're saying the same thing. But I think the backlash is coming from people in power, and those are the same people who always hold the power. It is born of a hierarchical system.
Thanks for your response. I hear you and see where we’re in agreement. I guess my question is, when you say that the backlash is coming from people in power (hence the firing) my guess (and in saying this I’m admitting it’s a guess) is that the people in power would argue (as you mentioned in your piece) that at least part of the reason for their “backlash” comes from a lack of sales (or a lack of earning out an advance) etc. And part of the point I’m trying to make is that perhaps some of the reason that sales for diverse authors aren’t where these people of power think they should be is because a lot of buyers (regular people) can see through this diversity push and despite the voices being represented still don’t feel their’s are. In other words, this is where the “anti-woke” is coming in because the authors who are being published or so largely a part of this rhetoric that people have heard it all now and don’t want to buy it anymore. It’s absolutely complicated. I think that’s why I’m not convinced of the backlash argument entirely. There’s always going to be an opposing voice that is sometimes louder and other times not. What’s going on here (to me) is also much more complicated.
That's a very interesting point/thesis, Candice. You're giving me food for thought... I have to wonder if Lisa Lucas was trying to do exactly what you're saying—pushing for a bigger more holistic approach. I had this exact thought, like she was trying to "diversify" (buzzword) by doing the approach you're saying, to have writers be writers and not boxed in. But that's all speculation. And agreed it's complicated. I appreciate this because I'm going to chew on it!!
Thanks for your comment and perhaps you could be right about Lisa Lucas? I think that Africa Brooke is an amazing voice in this conversation. I haven’t read her new book yet but her discussions around what diversity really is (as opposed to how it’s being represented) was real fuel for what I was feeling but couldn’t put words to.
Your voice is so very needed - you ignite our passion to make change. Thank you. I love you.
Forgive me if off-topic but perhaps another backlash? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/27/opinion/publishing-literary-antisemitism.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vE0.kw0E.iQcYTUzDs9FT&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
I don't think this fits the bill of backlash. Unfortunately it's just straight-up run-of-the-mill antisemitism rearing its head. I only say this because I don't think that Jews fit the profile of being held back when they're on the brink of progress. I think they fit the profile of being scapegoated and blamed for everything at various inflection points in history. But I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. I read this and I'm glad James Kirchick wrote the piece. Good that the NYT gave him space to do it bc a lot of people have been saying the media (NYT specifically) has been too silent.
OK, yes, I take your point on the distinction.
Having left the world of trad publishing years ago, I had no idea that this kind of backlash was going on. Backlash is, of course, evident in many aspects of our current society; I wrote about one of these aspects in a recent post (https://robinreardonwrites.substack.com/p/is-america-immature-and-paranoid).
I’ve wondered how strong the correlation is between anti-progress and paranoia. To those of us who live in the U.S., it’s easy to see it as more prevalent here. But as I glance around the globe, I see far-right politics (which is usually where we find the resistance to progress) either gaining ground or at least gaining footholds in many, many other countries.
I hope that when we see pushback against progress, it’s because we’ve made just that: progress. Though it does seem slow. And it can be profoundly frustrating.
Thanks for sharing this, and yes, backlash is lurking wherever there is progress. This argument that we are in this horrible political moment because we got the eight years of Obama, for instance, is a hard one to grapple with. That forces lie waiting... We think we're making progress, and then we have to pay for it.
As a historical writer, I tend to look at history and backlashes happen with every "new thing." What was once far right has a response far left and eventually the pendulum swings back to the middle, with acceptance. Maybe I'm naive, but if we keep standing up for our beliefs, they will eventually become mainstream.
Backlash IS the best description of what is happening and it is a toxic stew. I am still stunned at the firing of Lisa Lucas. Thanks for speaking up.
Brilliant, Brooke. Thanks for knitting these strands together. Thank you for using your experience not only to tell where we've been, but where we are going. Also, personally, I find this quote regarding Faludi--“backlashes rear up not when women have achieved equality but when they seem to be on the brink of achieving it"--on the nose on a period I'm writing about, immediately after World War II and women's mass entry into the work force in support of the war effort. All that progress made led to quite a backlash against the idea that We Can Do It.
Powerfully helpful in making sense of the current state of pretty much everything happening these days.
Thanks for sharing your insight. I wondered what happened, there. Very enlightening.
I'm grateful to you for writing this. So much needs to be talked about as DEI seems to be disappearing all around us. On a completely different topic, but one you touch on -- the large advance, in my opinion, isn't worth it. I'd rather get a mediocre advance, earn out faster, and see the royalty checks come in. In my experience, it's worked that way and I'm grateful.
Btw Brooke - thank you so much for your time a few weeks ago talking to the Laura Munson group!!! So appreciated it!
My pleasure. What a wonderful group of humans! ❤️ No surprise there, with Laura at the helm.
so true!! (about Laura! but, hey, yes! We are all wonderful humans!)
Stuff I needed to hear as a straight white man
Thank you for writing this piece and providing more resources at the bottom for people to keep this conversation going. It’s also not lost on me that the industry referred to Lucas’ hiring as “splashy”…
Thank you for keeping me informed.
Thanks for this well researched piece and for shedding light on some publishing “shadows” and murk
Thank you for this post, Brooke. Here in Texas, we know all about "too much, too fast." Texas' anti-DEI, anti-woke law, enthusiastically signed by Gov. Abbot last year, prohibits any state-govt hiring and training “in reference to race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation.” Two steps forward, 1.75 steps back.
You're optimistic. Isn't it more like 2 steps forward, 2.25 steps back in many instances these days?
Another brilliant post. Thank you for your insight and speaking up about the diversity in publishing.