Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



seiberwing ([info]seiberwing) wrote in [info]unfunny_fandom,
@ 2012-08-25 19:26:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Weird Racist Tales
Weird Tales, a fantasy/horror pulp magazine with a distinguished pedigree, has recently run into some trouble. Last week Marvin Kaye, who bought the magazine last year and fired the Hugo-award-winning staff decided to have the magazine publish the first chapter of Victoria Foyt's novel Save the Pearls.

If your face is currently in your palm, you probably already know why this was a bad idea.


From Amazon:
Eden Newman must mate before her 18th birthday in six months or she'll be left outside to die in a burning world. But who will pick up her mate-option when she's cursed with white skin and a tragically low mate-rate of 15%? In a post-apocalyptic, totalitarian, underground world where class and beauty are defined by resistance to an overheated environment, Eden's coloring brands her as a member of the lowest class, a weak and ugly Pearl. If only she can mate with a dark-skinned Coal from the ruling class, she'll be safe. Just maybe one Coal sees the Real Eden and will be her salvation. But when Eden unwittingly compromises her father's secret biological experiment, she finds herself in the eye of a storm and thrown into the last area of rainforest, a strange and dangerous land. Eden must fight to save her father, who may be humanity's last hope, while standing up to a powerful beast-man she believes is her enemy, despite her overwhelming attraction. Eden must change to survive but only if she can redefine her ideas of beauty and of love, along with a little help from her "adopted aunt" Emily Dickinson.

If this seems a little problematic to you, let me assure you that the actual book is far, far worse. In addition, Foyt's promotional works for the book have involved YouTube videos of white women in blackface and the author talking about how colorblind she is. Oh, and fake reviews. Understandably there's been controversy and most of Foyt's recent internet presence has been devoted to either fighting claims that her book might be a teensy bit racist or frantically deleting negative comments from her book's Facebook page.

When Kaye decided to publish the first chapter of Save the Pearls, he also put up a small defense of the book. It was later deleted, but nothing ever truly dies on the internet.

I have been an anthologist and magazine editor for most of my life, and as of last year became copublisher and editor of Weird Tales, America’s oldest fantasy magazine. In the upcoming issue, we are publishing the first chapter of Victoria Foyt’s SF novel, Saving the Pearls: Revealing Eden (the subtitle after the colon is an indication that the story will continue in a subsequent novel).

Weird Tales seldom prints SF, but this story is a compelling view of a world that didn’t listen to the warnings of ecologists, and a world that has developed a reverse racism: blacks dominating and detesting not just whites, but latinos and albinos, the few that still survive of the latter are hunted down and slaughtered.

It is the same literary technique employed in the off-Broadway musical a few years back, Zanna, Don’t!, set in a world where homosexuality is the norm, and a pair of heterosexual lovers are therefore socially condemned.

Racism is an atrocity, and that is the backbone of this book. That is very clear to anyone with an appreciation for irony who reads it.

I have noted the counterarguments that some Amazon readers have launched against the book and its author, and while I strongly disagree, this is America and they have the right to express their opinion(s).

But I also have been told that they have not stopped there, but also have attacked Amazon readers who describe the book in positive terms. I do not know if this is true, but if it is, it is mean-spirited, espcially if they have not read the entire book before condemning it, a charge that has also been leveled against some of them. Again, I do not know if this is true, or an exaggeration, but if these actions have, in fact, been performed, than I wish those who have done so a blessing and a curse.

The blessing is to wish they acquire sufficient wit, wisdom and depth of literary analysis to understand what they read, and also the compassion not to attack others merely because they hold a different opinion.

The curse is an integral part of the blessing…for if they do acquire those virtues, they will then necessarily look at their own behaviour, and be thoroughly ashamed.


On Monday, the publisher woke up and realized what had just happened.

I would like to tell our community that Weird Tales will NOT be running an excerpt from Victoria Foyt’s novel in our upcoming issue.

Marvin Kaye is our editor and has full control over fiction published in the magazine and website, and he agrees with me on this.

Marvin was approached by Victoria Foyt, and was asked to review her novel. He was told that she was being slammed online by people who had not read it.

I have not read the novel, but have gone over its online presence today. I have no need to read it. I saw the blackface video and read the excerpts the author and publisher chose to make available. I must conclude that the use of the powerful symbols of white people forced to wear blackface to escape the sun, white women lusting after black “beast men,” the “pearls” and “coals,” etc., is goddamned ridiculous and offensive. It seems like the work of someone who does not understand the power of what she is playing with.

Marvin says if you read the whole book, she explains her use of this imagery, and it ends up as a plea for tolerance. I say, so what. And that is the position of Weird Tales — and upon reviewing the video and other materials, Marvin is in full agreement.

I deeply apologize to all who were offended by our association with this book. I am offended by it. I fully respect those who have been writing negative things about us today. You are correct.

I have removed Marvin’s endorsement because he no longer stands by it. Marvin is traveling and will make his own statement shortly.


And by traveling I assume he means he's hiding in his closet until everyone forgets this ever happened.

Ann VanderMeer, previous senior editor who stayed on after the magazine was sold to Kaye, announced her resignation almost immediately. Her husband gives us a little more context on the clusterfuck.

But ever since a meeting with Kaye and Harlacher in New York in June, it had become obvious that she would be extremely uncomfortable working with them. Although they did not consult with her on editorial decisions, they did mention during that encounter that they planned to publish an excerpt from a YA novel written by the wife of a film director about “the last white person on the planet trying to survive in a world of black people.” This seemed deeply problematic on the face of it, and Ann was kind—perhaps too kind—but adamant and firm in saying that they shouldn’t do this. Ever. During this meal, a startling lack of understanding about international fiction and other subjects was also evinced, to the point that afterwards both Ann and I wished we had not stayed for the entire meal.

So this was in the works for several months and no one stepped in to say that this could conceivably be somewhat of a bad idea. N.K. Jemisin gives us more context, and laments the magazine's decline.

It’s more than the fact that the editor has chosen to introduce the revamped magazine with a diatribe against evil anti-racists, or evil people with no sense of irony, or something. It’s more than the stunningly poor judgment that he displays by hitching his magazine’s new applecart to this spavined old horse. It’s also the fact that they’re going to be publishing the first chapter of this hugely problematic book in Weird Tales. What the hell is that about? In all the furor over this book, no one is defending it as high-quality literature. It’s not even “weird”, in either the old-school pulp sense or the VanderMeer-era modern sense; it’s a slushpile-stock discrimiflip with implausible science and banal writing. This is a book whose author self-published it — perhaps because the publisher of her previous novel saw what a mess it was — and then promoted it via self-reviews on HuffPo and a bunch of vanity awards. Now I’m wondering whether she paid WT to publish this excerpt. Maybe she even bought Kaye’s editorial. Or maybe I’m overthinking this. Maybe Kaye just thought it was a great idea to start his new regime with a bang. Any publicity is good publicity, right? Right?

How much does a good reputation sell for, I wonder? Hope Kaye got a good price.


BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE: Kaye apparently is responding to people canceling their subscriptions over this issue. And not well, either. In addition this appears to be the same Kaye who reprinted Orson Scott Card's novella Hamlet's Father. So it seems he's got a history of not having the social sensitivity God gave a goat.


Moral of the wank: If you want to publish Lovecraftian stories, that's not the aspect of his work you want your submissions to be imitating.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-26 04:51 am UTC (link)
In a post-apocalyptic, totalitarian, underground world where class and beauty are defined by resistance to an overheated environment

That's not how class-linked ideas about beauty work, or have ever worked.

I knew this book was horrible and racist and gross, but I guess I didn't expect it to be so completely and totally broken on every single possible level. That'll learn me.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]seiberwing
2012-08-26 05:05 am UTC (link)
I've been reading the sporkings. It really is horrible and broken on every single level. But that's what you get when a book's inspired by a white girl's trauma at being called the n-word.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-26 05:55 am UTC (link)
She uses the term "Life-Band" seven times in the first 4 1/2 pages. (3-8, what's available on amazon.) Also on the first 4 1/2 pages: Pearl, Coal, Holo-Images, The Heat, Uni-Gov, Beauty Map, Priority One, Mood Scents, and Midnight Luster.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]seiberwing
2012-08-26 06:23 am UTC (link)
Now count how many times she uses 'they' or 'them' to refer to another race.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-09-03 07:08 am UTC (link)
Okay, like a week later, I've built up the fortitude to re-read those 4 1/2 pages.

Seven. All emphasized -- either italicized, or not-italicized when they're in Eden's thoughts, which are themselves italicized. She uses the word "they" twice when not referring to another race, and I was confused because she uses it so often to refer to another race, I didn't know to whom she could be referring. But then I realized that those theys weren't italicized so they were just normal theys.

This is so bad.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]catmoran
2012-08-26 04:08 pm UTC (link)
That's not how class-linked ideas about beauty work, or have ever worked.

I'd love it if you expanded on this a little -- I'm utterly ignorant of the subject.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bienegold
2012-08-26 04:20 pm UTC (link)
I'm guessing that it's about how beauty standards tend to be about having the ability/privilege to not have to deal with the environment.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]cmdr_zoom
2012-08-26 09:43 pm UTC (link)
e.g., all the royal portraits with cubicle tans and multiple chins, because they didn't have to get off their asses and work in the fields. Neatly reversed with the modern technopeasantry.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]eleutheria
2012-08-26 10:30 pm UTC (link)
Isn't that also somewhat culture-based, especially in a SFFnal sense? I'm thinking of the Quaddies from the Vorkosigan Saga verse, a society defined by the work gang, the word "work" as the highest praise, and the idea of slacking off in any way abhorrent to them. I've got something like that in what I'm worldbuilding, where not being able to deal with the hostile environment is a highly undesirable trait. But with them, discipline and self-denial are build hard into their whole social system, so I think it makes sense.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-26 11:02 pm UTC (link)
That's not a beauty standard for the Quaddie, it's a social standard that applies to everyone equally. They've got a near-utopia going in any case.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eleutheria
2012-08-27 02:40 am UTC (link)
Well, I wouldn't think it's all that utopian for people who aren't, for whatever reason, able to do as much work. (But then, I think that a lot of things about Beta Colony sound like hell, so ymmv.) I guess my question would be what would happen when you've got a marginal/survival situation where you can't have a layer of people sitting on their ass and not doing any work. Is it plausible to ever have it end up where the looks of the people best able to survive and function are the ones seen as admirable?

What I'm fishing for is what's plausible in secondary-world settings (which that awful book isn't), is it always going to shake out the way it does in the real world?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-27 11:45 pm UTC (link)
I think in a survival situation, social standards of beauty would likely fall by the wayside. People would still fall in love, and still have their own personal standards of attractiveness probably, and who knows how breeding would go. They might have to go for the most babies, with the most genetic variety possible, produced in the least amount of time. But the whole focus on physical beauty might just not be important. I've realized that the cultures I know about and am thinking of are all ones that were/are/thought they were safe. Starvation (well, unintentional starvation) at low levels, no worries about invasion (though in at least one case they should have worried), etc.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-26 11:01 pm UTC (link)
In a nutshell, yes, exactly.

There are also complications having to do with upper classes of women trying to emulate classes of women who are seen as more or solely sexual, though that tends to be in clothing rather than body shape or coloring. I have never heard of any society in which showing off that you're able to work harder and survive better is a beauty standard for women. It's the opposite.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]cmdr_zoom
2012-08-27 02:14 am UTC (link)
It tends to show up more in fictional societies with an authorial and/or cultural myth of being uberpeople, where everyone is above average, stronger, more beautiful, etc. (Except for the inevitable shunned defectives, of course.) But those are both questionably plausible and almost always shown from the POV of outsiders.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]issendai
2012-08-27 08:11 pm UTC (link)
Peasants in late Tsarist Russia preferred stocky, muscular women, to the point that thin women padded themselves out with extra clothing to look more attractive. I don't think the link between "looks like she can work hard" and "hot" was explicit, any more than "looks like she has the economic power to do what's necessary to stay thin" and "hot" are explicitly linked in ours, but the association was there.

Mind you, the anthropologist who documented this was the educated, "Europeanized" daughter of a landlord, one (very large) social step above the peasantry, and her own idea of beauty was the slender, refined maiden of the Victorian/Edwardian age. The peasants' idea of beauty horrified her. I think a group's ideal is based on what's economically feasible in their social universe. If it's possible and economically rewarding for you to reach for the life of someone who sits indoors and never does hard work, then that look is going to be what's hot. If you're incapable of reaching above your social level, but hard work will improve your economic status, then looking like a hard worker will be hot.

tl;dr Follow the money.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-27 10:59 pm UTC (link)
If you're incapable of reaching above your social level, but hard work will improve your economic status, then looking like a hard worker will be hot.

Women throughout any given society have often crippled, poisoned, abused, and starved themselves in order to attain certain looks, though. No matter their social status. Even when it meant they literally could not do the labor that was necessary to keep their families at the same economic level.

The thing about Tsarist Russia is interesting, and I wonder if the fact that the gap between the nobility and the serfs was so incredibly huge had something to do with it. Though there have been, and are, huge gaps between social class while the lowest women on the rung attempt to emulate the highest plenty (and are shamed and considered unmarriageable if they don't).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2012-08-27 11:49 pm UTC (link)
Oh, absolutely. To take an extreme example, in areas of China with a large Manchu population, the Han Chinese bound women's feet at a much higher rate than the rest of the country--sometimes to the point that even slave girls' feet were bound. It was more important to establish us/not-us distinctions than to preserve half the population's economic value.

The thing about Tsarist Russia is interesting, and I wonder if the fact that the gap between the nobility and the serfs was so incredibly huge had something to do with it.

Very likely. The peasants (not serfs, though they might have been the descendants of serfs) had a zero-sum conception of the world, so if one of their fellows rose above the others, he was somehow taking something from everybody else. There was one older peasant who wanted to start an orchard next to his house, but people broke in and destroyed the trees so often that he had to give it up. The orchard wasn't on contested land, or likely to overshadow someone else's garden, or a symbol of the man's religious or political beliefs. It was just his attempt to enrich himself. Unacceptable. Must go. In a system as hermetically sealed as that, the peasants were probably finely tuned to what was good for them, and to hell with the rest of it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-28 04:13 am UTC (link)
It was more important to establish us/not-us distinctions than to preserve half the population's economic value.

Yep. And in what I (and my China history professor) think was not a coincidence, China was conquered at almost exactly the same time foot-binding spread through the whole population. How can a man be a soldier when there is no adult at home who is physically capable of taking care of the farm?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2012-08-28 11:19 pm UTC (link)
Huh! I hadn't heard that part--the analysis I read focused on footbinding as a reaction to the invaders' culture, not to the threat of war. Did rules regarding conscription (or trends in who was conscripted) change as footbinding became more common?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-08-29 03:12 am UTC (link)
We didn't go that in depth -- it was only a survey course. Iirc, I mentioned that China got conquered right after foot binding became prevalent, and asked if the professor thought those things were related, and she said "yep", and the class started talking about how if the women at home can't run things, the army isn't going to do well at all, both because more men will avoid becoming soldiers and because there won't be enough to eat, and the professor said "yep".

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sandglass
2012-08-27 11:07 pm UTC (link)
I think our current definition of beauty is going to be a bit skewed from that kind of logic, too, since so much of it is driven now by marketers trying to convince people that they need to buy stuff to be pretty. Being able to buy that stuff is an indicator of wealth, but it seems to me to be more picking an unattainable standard of beauty so that incredibly few can reach it and everyone else is a potential customer.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2012-08-27 11:56 pm UTC (link)
Agreed. We're being encouraged to compete on an international stage, with role models who are professional pretty people, and we're encouraged to believe that we have infinite potential for social mobility. We're also continually shown examples of people who started at the bottom and made it to the top. We're made to feel that if we don't reach for the very tippy-top, we don't believe in ourselves and we're not giving ourselves what we deserve--and after all, it's not that hard to get there, is it? It's a fantastic way to convince people to flush their money down the drain.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]franzen
2012-09-01 02:07 am UTC (link)
Just adding to what's already been said: basically, what's considered beautiful depends by class stratification as well as what resources are available to each group. The classic example is older ideas of fat = good, as having extra body fat was an indication that your family was rich enough to afford surplus food, meats and other expensive items, etc. In the modern western world, being thin is a sign of control and a way of suggesting that you have so much money, you can afford to keep your body just on the starvation line, as if there were a crisis, you would be able to purchase food regardless. &c.

There's also the problem of importing beauty standards from another culture and internalized colour hierarchies. Colonisation privileged those with lighter skin and led to plenty of "mixed" children, so that several generations later, there are plenty of pale-skinned, blue-eyed people born below the Northern Hemisphere. Shocking. If you're born into a lower class (economically) but fit the beauty ideals of a higher class, you're going to have an easier time moving up the hierarchy, as you'll inherit all the privileges that come from fitting the ideal.

"Beauty" is always a social construction and determined by the money and resources of the highest ranking. For women, that means nothing is ever good enough and the FDA has given up regulating cosmetics, because if they had to prosecute the false claims by advertisers, they'd be backlogged for years. Naomi Wolf talks about this in-depth in The Beauty Myth, as well as how this is a great way to suck any disposable income away from women (so even if you rise a class economically, you gain new responsibilities -- such as keeping up with the latest fashions, haircuts, makeup, etc., all of which take a huge chunk out of your paycheck).

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map