(no subject)

[skygiants]

I've been pondering the question of Haruki Murakami's The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle since I finished it almost two weeks ago, and I still can't decide whether I actually liked it or not. The plot is pretty simple: a guy quits his job and takes some time off to think about his place in the universe. His cat goes missing. Then his wife goes missing. Various strange women appear and make bizarre statements at him, and occasionally and mysteriously give him large sums of money, so he decides to go sit at the bottom of a well every day so that he will have the psychic power to break into an imaginary hotel and destroy his evil politician brother-in-law. Also, he gets a magic bruise on his face that heals people. The main character takes this all pretty much in stride, since he hasn't really got anything better to do with his life.

. . . it doesn't actually make all that much more sense in the book. The thing is, I think I might like the way the whole Utterly Ordinary Everyman/Utterly Bizarre Events contrast is set up. But maybe the events are way too bizarre and there's not enough of a point and the character doesn't actually develop, so maybe I didn't like it. But then again maybe there's a subversive thing going on with the nature of victimhood and rescue and what happens in the end with the guy's wife, and maybe I do like that. I don't know!

So . . . that was probably a really helpful book write-up for you guys. Um. However, while I'm here, I'm going to take the opportunity to lunge into a sort-of ibarw post. I have been trying, at least - with only limited success, but it's a step - to mix up my reading list so it's not All White Authors, All The Time. I am not officially doing 50books_poc, although it's a great community, because I know how easy it would be for me to read fifty in a rush and then figure I'd done my job and stop. Instead, I'm trying to change my reading habits. It's not easy - right now my ratio is still, like, 1/10, which is not really good enough (for me, and my own standards for myself right now; I am not telling anyone else what they should do!) but it's better than it was, so I count that as a start.

However, one thing I have noticed, while trying to put this into practice: I really dislike the genre categorization of books in most mainstream bookstores. I mean, I have issues with division by genre in general (shati can attest to hearing me walking around the Strand crying 'but - but that doesn't belong there! What! WHAT!') but the issue I have right now is with the creation of 'African-American' as a genre. First of all, this means that it excludes people like Zora Neale Hurston from the 'literature' category, which is a big enough WTF to begin with, I think. And how many of us who are not the target audience ever spend time in that area of a bookstore? I know, before I started thinking about it, that I absolutely never did. On a more meta level, though, while I understand the logic of having a sci-fi/fantasy section, a mystery section, a romance section for people who just want to read within a specific genre - and I certainly make use of the sff section often enough - having 'black author/black protagonist' divided from all the other books feels very, very strange to me. (Also, while we are at it, where is the Asian-American section, or the Latino/Chicano/Hispanic section, or the Indian-American section? It's just so bizarre!!) And while sci-fi, or romance, or mystery books often are allowed to rise out of their genre ghetto if they are deemed 'literary' enough by whoever makes decisions about TPBs versus mass-market paperbacks and marketing in bookstores and such things, all you have to do is go back to Zora Neale Hurston and James Baldwin and all the authors who hang out in the African-American section to show that that's not the case here.

Now, all that being said, there is one really good reason to have an African-American section, which is so that people who are starved for representations of themselves in books know where to go to find books that are likely to have strong and positive characters. And maybe that's enough to outweigh the other issues. Once again, I have to end on an 'I don't know' - but I do think that division makes it easier for people to ignore and avoid black authors, just by not browsing in one little section of the store.

Comments

[gules]

I do think that division makes it easier for people to ignore and avoid black authors, just by not browsing in one little section of the store. absolutely agreed -- i mean, i personally am not avoiding black authors, i don't think, but i certainly don't stumble across them either, because they are, as you say, cordoned off.

on the other hand, i'd almost appreciate further subdivision of the "literature" section, because it's enormous as is, to the point of being unbrowseable. so in conclusion, um, i don't really know either. /o\

[skygiants]

Yeah, I get that viewpoint (browsing is hard!), but it's difficult for me to think of a way to work it, because so many books are done a great disservice to by labeling them with one genre and leaving it at that.

Uh. More browsing time is clearly the answer!

[gules]

always!

[schiarire.livejournal.com]

I think that, for me, there's no way in which keeping "African-American Literature" separate from "Literature" is good. Does it make it easier for me to find Zora Neale Hurston? Only if I know that she isn't included in "Literature," because otherwise, that's where I'll be looking. Plus, if you are starved for representations of yourself in books and ... they're being kept separate from all the other books solely because they were written by people who look like you, I really don't think that helps you in your quest for positive self-image.

It's also not as if it's strictly Zora Neale Hurston &co. in there, because it's also lots of books that otherwise would be shelved under SFF (Octavia Butler) or romance (I don't know these names because I hate romance). The "African-American" section is actually a genre potpourri, except for the authors' race, which is not how authors of other races are treated.

But it isn't even just that, because: I'm pretty sure black African writers are shelved in "Literature," unlike African-American writers. (This based on where I found Chinua Achebe.) If so, the whole thing is even more fucked up, and I'm not sure how to think about this aspect of it.

[skygiants]

Yeah, I'm not sure it does either. I'm also thinking of Shati's arguments in favor of BET and other heavily African-American oriented TV channels, though, which is that at least you know that they're there and sort of visible and can act as kind of a safe zone. But I don't know if it's entirely analogous.

It's also thoroughly random a lot of the time, I think - I'm actually pretty sure Octavia Butler is often shelved in SFF, or at least that's where I find her. But also, the advertising for the section - the books they put on top of the shelves and make highly visible - are pretty much always romance, and while I personally have nothing against romance, that gives a really disproportionate view of the whole section. So it's fucked-up marketing as well as a weird concept.

. . . that is ridiculously lacking in sense. What!

[schiarire.livejournal.com]

Yes ... well, I'm not African-American, so I can't say if it acts as a safe zone for me personally or not. That will remain open to potential readers who could say :)

Insofar as imagination is useful, I don't imagine that I would find an Asian-American section particularly comfortable, especially if it meant that Asian-American fiction was systematically removed from the common "Literature" grouping (while Asian-non-American fiction, such as for example Haruki Murakami, remained there). Like: "Jewish-American"? Including Chaim Potok, Michael Chabon, and genre romance, but not Kafka? In a corner? Does this create safe zone feelings?


At the local Borders, Octavia Butler is definitely in African-American! She may also be in SFF; I haven't looked. Or it may be that some of her books are in each?

[skygiants]

I do not feel it would create safe zone feelings for me either, but I also feel like i should not speak for others because the situation is so different . . . I mean, I find it very hard to imagine with Jewish-American authors, but that is perhaps the point of the exercise. But I also do not feel so much in need of a safe zone. Irrelevant sidenote: I never think of Kafka as a Jewish author. Or rather I forget he is Jewish and then go '- oh yeah! Huh!' every time I remember. Actually, this may not be so much irrelevant; people are never going to forget that, say, Langston Hughes is black. He is a black poet, he is never just a poet. And this may have a lot to do with the shelving as well. Not that it should be forgotten per se, but I think you know what I mean. (Equally irrelevant sidenote: I am not at all sure that Jewish genre romance exists. If it does, I may have to read it just out of curiosity!)

That last might be the case! Or copies possibly placed in both, even. Now I am curious - I should check next time I'm in the bookstore. (With other authors who span genres too.)

[ceitfianna]

Did you see the article in the most recent nytimes Book Review about authors getting classified as Young Adult versus regular fiction?

I found it really interesting and I was wondering, what order would you recommend reading the Dalemark Quartet in?

Also just general *hugs* I have a job interview in Philly on Monday but also backed into someone.

[skygiants]

Ooh, I did not, and I should totally read it, because that's absolutely something I'm interested in.

As for the Dalemark Quartet - well, the official order is pretty good! That goes Cart and Cwidder, Drowned Ammet, The Spellcoats, and Crown of Dalemark. However, you might just as easily switch around Drowned Ammet and Cart and Cwidder, and that might even work better, because I secretly think Drowned Ammet is a better book. But definitely don't read The Spellcoats first; even though it comes chronologically first in the timeline it is the kind of prequel that needs to be read after you already have context. And definitely read Crown of Dalemark last, because it combines them all!

*hugsback* Ack! That sucks. D: But yay for job interview! I may have to be in NY again on Monday for my own job, if it comes through (all very whirlwind! Interview today, they might want me to start next week, we will see) but I might not, so let me know when you'll be there, anyways!

[ceitfianna]

Here's the article, and yeah the accident shook me up since I got lost and backed into a parked car.

It ruined my plans to have a nice lunch and then go to the library so will do that tomorrow.

The job's at a lab in UPenn and we'll probably either spend the night before or after or maybe both, not sure which.

I'll keep you posted and if this doesn't work out something else will.

[skygiants]

That article is fascinating - especially because a lot of the people I talk to (who in no way represent a major part of the population, but) think that YA is really where a lot of the most interesting and creative lit is shelved these days, especially fantasy. Maybe because YA is often a genre in and of itself, so books that are less easy to pigeonhole become more common?

Definitely! Especially let me know if you're going to be there the night before - but if you're working in Philly, then I'll definitely be back there lots, so there's no way we won't catch each other sometime. :D

[agentclaudia.livejournal.com]

I think they should keep the separate sections for minority writers, and then prominently label the section for books by and about white people "White People," just to make everybody really uncomfortable.

[skygiants]

That would at the very least be fair!

[the_croupier]

Oh god. This is a perennially controversial topic among book retailers, but alas, there's no real solution.

The reason why is pretty simple. Retailers do see the difficult issues involved here, and they have no interest other than pleasing customers. The problem is, whenever they do customer surveys and market research on this, customer preference tends to break pretty close to 50/50 on a) keep the African-American section or b) shelve them in literature.

So they're pretty much screwed no matter what they do, and that's why they tend to stick with whatever is already arranged in the store (with occasional exceptions when a particular community, for whatever reason, breaks hard in one direction or the other).

At least this was the case when I was in the book trade, but I suspect it really hasn't changed. Which means the problem isn't likely to go away.

[skygiants]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's not a Grand Conspiracy of Booksellers or anything like that. :D But I would be curious about the demographic breakdowns of those surveys. 50% is a lot of people!

(It is definitely good to have book trade expertise around the LJ.)

[the_croupier]

Not necessarily a lot of people. These were marketing surveys, usually, by one or another book retailer. So they're not shots in the dark, but they're not as extensive as a poll done by the NY Times or CNN or something.

But every time we got into the discussion, the people who had seen the results said they weren't really conclusive one way or another. And I believe them because we always wanted to deal with the problem however most customers wanted us too.