Anonymous
11/06/2022 17:20
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.
Ugh yes.
Examples ?
There’s a whole Reddit forum called Menwritingwomen with hilarious examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/
Well in defense of male writers, there are plenty of females who write women badly as well! Maybe there are just a bunch of average writers getting published!
Anonymous
11/06/2022 17:11
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.
Ugh yes.
Examples ?
There’s a whole Reddit forum called Menwritingwomen with hilarious examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/
Ha, beat me to it
Anonymous
11/06/2022 17:09
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.
Ugh yes.
Examples ?
There’s a whole Reddit forum called Menwritingwomen with hilarious examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/
Anonymous
11/06/2022 16:51
Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.
Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.
Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.
Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.
It's definitely hard for white writers to include authentic POC. They don't have the experience, or they don't want to engage in cultural appropriation. So they end up doing a lousy job.
True. And I’m glad when they try to be inclusive. Still, that teams including authors, editors, and presumably additional readers get so stuck is unfortunate on many levels. It says a lot about the publishing industry.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 16:47
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.
Ugh yes.
Examples ?
Anonymous
11/06/2022 16:37
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.
Ugh yes.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 16:28
Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.
Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.
Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.
Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.
It's definitely hard for white writers to include authentic POC. They don't have the experience, or they don't want to engage in cultural appropriation. So they end up doing a lousy job.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 13:16
Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.
Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.
Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.
Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.
Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.
Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.
Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 12:02
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I found it disconcerting after Gone Girl that every single book had Girl in the title
Girl on a Train
Girl in the window
etc etc
Yes, and all the covers with the backs of women. Like we don't even get to see a woman's face.
I kind of like them.
The Fairfax B&N had a table poking fun of those covers. I had read half the books on it.
Local author Susan Coll's new book, Bookish, pokes fun at covers with pictures of women's feet.
Should have mentioned, Coll also pokes fun at a book called "The Woman in Gauzy Blue" that her bookstore is supposed to be promoting.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 12:00
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I found it disconcerting after Gone Girl that every single book had Girl in the title
Girl on a Train
Girl in the window
etc etc
Yes, and all the covers with the backs of women. Like we don't even get to see a woman's face.
I kind of like them.
The Fairfax B&N had a table poking fun of those covers. I had read half the books on it.
Local author Susan Coll's new book, Bookish, pokes fun at covers with pictures of women's feet.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 11:59
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Literary fiction that needs a lesbian and an evil priest to get published.
I actually have a wonderful gay daughter. But c'mon, these tropes are so common, can't we start doing something else?
I actually have a wonderful gay daughter. But c'mon, these tropes are so common, can't we start doing something else?
Anonymous
11/06/2022 10:42
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
I have a general complaint- literary fiction doesn’t have sex anymore. Only romance/thriller genres do. I read publishers have stayed away from manuscripts that are too sexy, which is disappointing because I enjoy stories that have one or two sex scenes. How can you write about life, but then skip over our sexual lives?
Anonymous
11/06/2022 09:35
Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
I don't like when they put the page numbers anywhere other than the corners.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 09:20
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
I find myself avoiding new writers. I like the steady confident writing of authors who have been at their game awhile. I feel like I can settle in and get ready for a good story.
Anonymous
11/06/2022 09:16
Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Fun thing I saw on Instagram: a bookseller said deckled edges aren’t done outside of the US these days.
Well they're wrong. I've seen them in London recently.