![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A quick query - on representing the other, widely defined. Actually, not so quick, as it keeps bashing into binaries of power which are not-so-binary when it comes to practise; the ideology is either/or, the practice is sometimes both/and.
We must all be familiar with criticism which is aware of absences, usually with a small-p political agenda - where are all the women in The Dark Knight, where are all the Africa Americas in Friends or Afro-Caribbeans in Notting Hill? I've just read a swathe of 1970s sf in search of homosexuality - and largely found bisexuals and forms of transgendered people, but next to no gays.
It is as every character in fiction is white, male, heterosexual, and of course the market is structured that white, male heterosexuals have easier access to it. (I'm stating this as a fact - the white, male heterosexual plot to take over the world...)
Equally we can all cite those embarrassing examples when authors have got it wrong - the African American with that sense of rhythm, the woman who keeps looking at her breasts, the gay who likes show tunes and dreams of Dorothy.
Given how many men there are in the media, I suspect it is easier for women to create convincing men then vice versa. My hunch from the suspicion is that holds for ethnicity, sexuality, handedness, age, and so forth. This thought is prompted in part by the passionate discussion and argument elsewhere in the virtual realm - but it's nothing I haven't pondered about before.
I'll boil the question down to the concrete, because I don't want to be tangled up in dominant/normal/majority/privilege as terms, although I'm sure you'd know what I mean.
Should men try to depict women - however badly - rather than ignore them?
Should white people try to depict People of Colour, rather than an all-white society?
Should heterosexuals try to depict other sexualities, or assume heteronormativity?
Your bonus: how legitimate is it to use one class of representing the "other" as a metaphor or allegory for another?
ETA: I've just marked an essay citing bell hooks and Stuart Hall on white privilege. Heigho. I've also modified the first question to parallel the syntax more.
I suspect behind the bonus question is both a) the use of aliens as metaphor for otherness and b) the identificatory reading strategies one might have to use having not found a proxy for yourself in the text (which might lead one to say, "I'm not x but I am y, so I understand your pain.")
We must all be familiar with criticism which is aware of absences, usually with a small-p political agenda - where are all the women in The Dark Knight, where are all the Africa Americas in Friends or Afro-Caribbeans in Notting Hill? I've just read a swathe of 1970s sf in search of homosexuality - and largely found bisexuals and forms of transgendered people, but next to no gays.
It is as every character in fiction is white, male, heterosexual, and of course the market is structured that white, male heterosexuals have easier access to it. (I'm stating this as a fact - the white, male heterosexual plot to take over the world...)
Equally we can all cite those embarrassing examples when authors have got it wrong - the African American with that sense of rhythm, the woman who keeps looking at her breasts, the gay who likes show tunes and dreams of Dorothy.
Given how many men there are in the media, I suspect it is easier for women to create convincing men then vice versa. My hunch from the suspicion is that holds for ethnicity, sexuality, handedness, age, and so forth. This thought is prompted in part by the passionate discussion and argument elsewhere in the virtual realm - but it's nothing I haven't pondered about before.
I'll boil the question down to the concrete, because I don't want to be tangled up in dominant/normal/majority/privilege as terms, although I'm sure you'd know what I mean.
Should men try to depict women - however badly - rather than ignore them?
Should white people try to depict People of Colour, rather than an all-white society?
Should heterosexuals try to depict other sexualities, or assume heteronormativity?
Your bonus: how legitimate is it to use one class of representing the "other" as a metaphor or allegory for another?
ETA: I've just marked an essay citing bell hooks and Stuart Hall on white privilege. Heigho. I've also modified the first question to parallel the syntax more.
I suspect behind the bonus question is both a) the use of aliens as metaphor for otherness and b) the identificatory reading strategies one might have to use having not found a proxy for yourself in the text (which might lead one to say, "I'm not x but I am y, so I understand your pain.")
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
Yes
Yes
er... it mostly ends up clumsy whenever one uses metaphor or allegory in this way.
From:
no subject
The Planet of the Apes films says interesting thing about racial policy and racism - until you think too closely about the positioning of gorillas, chimps and orang utans. (And note the New York Post cartoon using a monkey*)
* Steve Bell frequently used monkey imagery to portray Bush, there's the various websites of "Bush or chimp?". Obama - not going to see monkeys in those cartoons/websites.
From:
no subject
THE FUTURE BELONGS TO MEEEEEE!!!!
From:
no subject
But are you not too engrained in your Stross privilege for this to be unconvincing?
From:
no subject
I can try to do the Other, but ...
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I'm not quite sure what you mean by apartheid in this context.
From:
no subject
I've *never* seen one with a multi-racial couple.
In the less machined romance genre, there are occasional references, but in that written for black women, white women tend to appear as the enemy, competing for black men.
From:
no subject
Covers might be misleading, of course. I suspect (I'm trying to remember back to the three M&B I read - I have this vague memory of something; Arab? Gulf? One of them was very postmodern and had the writer annoyed with her characters for not behaving well enough) that there is the foreign man, which acts metaphorically. I'd be surprised in the Black Lace series maintained racial distinctions throughout, but I certainly can't cite a counter example.
The male gay equivalent to Black Lace does go interracial - at the risk of racism or at least racial stereotyping.
The representation of male desire frequently includes that element of difference - is the female version overshadowed by Othello?
From:
no subject
Yes (is called 'realism')
Yes
Depends how well it's done.
Bonus observation: it's easier for an individual to be a little bit gay than a little bit Black.
Bonus entanglement: but is it all about definition and self-definition?
Bonus offer: I'll shut up now.
From:
no subject
Easier in the sense of lifestyles are more comfortable in terms of sexuality or ethnicity, or easier in the sense of [someone's?] definitions allow sexuality to be a spectrum but ethnicity is er... either/or. (As someone said last week, "Immigration is not a black and white issue.) Whilst individuals might have a fraction of heritage a in their family tree, they are defined by fraction b? Or easy in the sense of being able to choose sexuality, but having ethnicity chosen for you?
Bonus entanglement: but is it all about definition and self-definition?
Theoretically it should be about self-definition - it's only polite to allow someone to identify as -------. But then I think of the white kids I know who speak in Jamaican accents and wonder.
Bonus offer: I'll shut up now.
Please don't.
From:
no subject
I am increasingly tempted to send off for one of those Genetic Assay thingies, because I have peculiar ancestry and would like it unpicked. That ancestry doesn't have much to do with how I define myself (which is by fraction (a), Mostly Caucasian), but it is part of me, physically at least.
See? Not shutting up :)
From:
no subject
Ahem.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
My instinct is to say fail better - having listened to those who say you failed.
And of course there is only a proportion (albeit large) of men defined by cars and football. I can just about pass on football these days, and I confess to enjoying Top Gear (which is little to do with cars) but Nutz or Zoo I would just flick through.
From:
no subject