If you choose to put fences around your creativity that is your decision. I can't think of any great writer in history that I could imagine getting permission from themselves to write their stories. This seems dangerous to me in many ways - we need to release our creativity - not imprison it!
i think you should write when you think you have a good story irrespective of whether its inside or outside of your culture, after all you are a global citizen first and the world has never been more global than now. Of course some people will complain, just as Indians have often complained in the past, about westerners writing Indian poverty porn. Any form of criticism for cultural appropriation will come with the territory and it is totally the writers prerogative whether to wade in or not.
Indians were all agog about the Ambani wedding(and also very critical, cos Indians have had a socialist period that is still well entrenched in the mindset despite social climbers and the celebrity rise).To my mind the wedding was PR stunt for the Reliance brand which is inviting a lot of luxury brands into the country, and if that's good for the economy (if India is to be the second or third superpower this century) its also good for Brand India. The movie Barbie for instance was more about reinventing Matel rather than feminism. To some generations of Indians who smarted under colonial complexes, the Ambanis extravagance would be like the return of the age of the Maharajahs when India was the richest country in the world. But the fact is that there are still a lot of people who are poorly off worldly over despite government schemes and trade unionism. (I am Indian BTW). And India aside, European and American politics is also dominated by the discourse about those who got a smaller share of the pie. Why else has Labour come back to power in the UK. If the writer has to write the writer must write.
Interesting take re. the wedding essentially being a PR stunt. I did read something about the two designers that were used and how the Ambani family has large investments in those designers' brand, which would further prove your point. Your last line is beautiful, though. "If the writer has to write, the writer must write."
Great discussion you opened, Kern. Thank you! I esp. like Imola's comments re: respect and research. I come from a journalism background and that's what we did every working day: dive into a topic, a culture, a person and try to learn as much as we could so that we could write intelligently and respectfully about it. It was understood from the get-go that we were "outsiders" trying to understand our subject as thoroughly as possible before we ever typed a single word.
I never thought of journalists in this discussion, Jeanne. But you're so right. It's literally your job to dive into other worlds and come out with something that is not just readable, but fair, thoughtful, insightful, and reflective (or critical) of whatever world you're writing about. Really good note. Thanks for that one.
A tough one but…Hanya Yanagihara wrote “A Little Life,” and she is not a gay man. That novel has been praised by gay authors as a quintessential gay novel. It also won awards.
I think anyone can write about anything, but the question is are you able to write about it so well that those who identify in real life as the subjects will recognize themselves in it truthfully rather than feeling caricatured?
Are you willing to go there in terms of potential criticism that may engulf you? Is the writing so good it can withstand today’s culture war fires and come out the other side as a diamond? 💎
Are you sensitive and detail oriented enough to get so down into the details research wise to understand your characters body, mind, and soul?
If so, yes. Write it!! Your ideas and your voice should be heard. Maybe you have a unique perspective on the subject matter precisely because you are an outsider.
Oh Autumn, I love his paragraph: "I think anyone can write about anything, but the question is are you able to write about it so well that those who identify in real life as the subjects will recognize themselves in it truthfully rather than feeling caricatured?"
You can also structure the novel in a way that acknowledges the lens of it as through the outsider’s perspective. That way, you allow yourself some room to create a narrator that may actually hold flaws in his/her/their understanding of the culture they don’t belong to and a story based off an unreliable narrator.
My personal opinion is that you can write about whatever you want, as long as you do it respectfully and with a lot of research on the aspects of culture you are not familiar with. BUT, I totally hear you, and I know I could get into trouble for saying that. “A privileged white woman (because this is what my skin colour suggests, although my circumstances are indicating something very different) who is culturally appropriating/ repressing the marginalized. My best friend who is Sri- Lankan and gay always teases me and laughs about it. He thinks it’s total bullshit. He can laugh about this, but if I were to do the same, I’d get myself into a whole lot of trouble! I was warned by a friend who works for the CCA that the work I submitted for consideration could be deemed “cultural appropriation” because I chose to write the story from a male perspective, even though men have been writing about women for decades. And, I had a gay character in it (inspired by my best friend who happens to be gay) and I was straight.
So, in short, I hope that things will change in our culture because this is a very boring and limiting environment to be creative in. I think there are so many great stories to be explored and as long as we do this with reverence and curiosity it should be a positive thing. Our identities, cultures, gender etc should not matter. What matters is the story/ work of art. Stories bring us together!
I can't believe someone questioned you for writing from the male perspective. The audacity is wild. And I think your first point should go without say (though I know it still needs to be said) and is relevant for all writing. If you aren't familiar with an aspect of your story, whatever that aspect is, do your research and handle it respectfully.
I understand where this sensitivity comes from though. The arrogance of some white writers in the past writing about “the savages” they colonised… but now we seem to be in another extreme where we are cued to box ourselves into an “identity” which is one thing, and not a complex of many things, and stay in that identity box when we write. I reject this idea. We are far more interesting than that!! And you know what amazes me every time?? How much I seem to have in common with my black/ Indian/ Sri Lankan / Jewish friends when we share our stories. At the end of the day, we are just human beings! We love, we hurt, we strive… our plights are so recognisable.
Nice! I'll check the link. I'm also listening to a book of essays by Pullman and in the very first essay, he says if a culture is not engaging in exchange, it becomes dormant, then stale, then rotten (not exactly quote).
My two cents: there is not such thing as a pure culture. Every culture is ultimately the product of centuries and centuries of cultural encounter and exchange. The question of whether any given cultural practice, etc. belongs to any one culture is often a very complex question. For an obvious example, anime originated in what one might call cultural appropriation, from Japanese animators taking inspiration from Disney cartoons. Would anyone argue against anime being an authentic part of Japanese culture?
Oh what an interesting point. I need to think through (sit with) what I feel about culture essentially not belonging to any one group, but my immediate reaction is fascination. I also didn't know about Disney amd anime.
In the words of Tezuka Osamu, the "father of manga" and creator of Astro Boy, "I liked Disney, I adored Disney, here before you is a man whose life was determined by Disney."
One can certainly find other examples. So much of what we think of as Japanese culture is originally Chinese: one of their writing systems, many words (including words everyone knows like kawaii, to the point that a Chinese relative of mine can read quite a bit of Japanese without having to learn the language), tea and the tea ceremony, rice cultivation, Zen Buddhism, etc. And then originally American aspects like anime/manga, with origins in American comics and animation, and baseball. You could make similar lists for any culture, probably. Certainly for the United States.
The language we're communicating in right now has French words, Italian words, Latin words, Greek words, Arabic words, Tagalog words, Farsi words, Hindi words, etc. A single English sentence can be in some sense doubly or triply or quadruply multicultural.
Interesting coincidence, as I was just having a conversation with myself on this topic yesterday, while I was out taking a walk. I have somewhat strong opinions about cultural appropriation, so please understand they are my opinions alone, and I know this is a sensitive topic for some.
I believe there are few concepts more antithetical to authors and writing than cultural appropriation. By the very nature of what we do—create characters and worlds—we cannot possibly produce creative works by limiting ourselves only to our own very specific identities and lived experiences. If that were the case, then an white man from Ohio could write a book ONLY about life in Ohio with ONLY white male characters, and so on.
I don't deny the existence nor the destructive nature of cultural appropriation. But I define it much more narrowly than some. I consider it to be appropriation with actual intention for exploitation (or reckless disregard of it)—for example, making no sincere attempts to achieve authenticity through research, meeting and talking to people from the culture in question, and the engagement of sensitivity readers where appropriate.
If an author is doing their best to present authentic characters and stories by way of the aforementioned steps, then I don't consider that to be cultural appropriation in any way. Labeling authors as appropriators when they are taking such steps will have a massive chilling effect on creativity.
It does feel antithetical to being a writer, doesn't it? Like you're telling us to not imagine outside of the lines. How does that make sense? But to your point, and someone else's in these comments, there has been some foul play in the past that makes appropriation more sensitive. Your point about intent is also well stated.
This was a riveting, excellent novel, but the author was accused of cultural appropriation simply because she was a white woman with no connection to Mexico. "But it matters in this case that the source is a European-born woman in the U.S. without ties to the Mexican migrant experience."
I haven’t read the book yet, but I’ve wondered how insensitive it was (or if it was insensitive). If it wasn’t, then how much of the uproar was really more about jealousy that this particular book was being highly praised and lauded and was likely to be a bestseller? There’s some historical issues and economic issues involved with this, but we also do work in highly competitive markets and industries. Jealousy can and does happen. People do try to unfairly sabotage others.
If you choose to put fences around your creativity that is your decision. I can't think of any great writer in history that I could imagine getting permission from themselves to write their stories. This seems dangerous to me in many ways - we need to release our creativity - not imprison it!
Yes! Creativity needs to be released, not caged.
i think you should write when you think you have a good story irrespective of whether its inside or outside of your culture, after all you are a global citizen first and the world has never been more global than now. Of course some people will complain, just as Indians have often complained in the past, about westerners writing Indian poverty porn. Any form of criticism for cultural appropriation will come with the territory and it is totally the writers prerogative whether to wade in or not.
Indians were all agog about the Ambani wedding(and also very critical, cos Indians have had a socialist period that is still well entrenched in the mindset despite social climbers and the celebrity rise).To my mind the wedding was PR stunt for the Reliance brand which is inviting a lot of luxury brands into the country, and if that's good for the economy (if India is to be the second or third superpower this century) its also good for Brand India. The movie Barbie for instance was more about reinventing Matel rather than feminism. To some generations of Indians who smarted under colonial complexes, the Ambanis extravagance would be like the return of the age of the Maharajahs when India was the richest country in the world. But the fact is that there are still a lot of people who are poorly off worldly over despite government schemes and trade unionism. (I am Indian BTW). And India aside, European and American politics is also dominated by the discourse about those who got a smaller share of the pie. Why else has Labour come back to power in the UK. If the writer has to write the writer must write.
Interesting take re. the wedding essentially being a PR stunt. I did read something about the two designers that were used and how the Ambani family has large investments in those designers' brand, which would further prove your point. Your last line is beautiful, though. "If the writer has to write, the writer must write."
thanks! best of luck with your book! :)
Great discussion you opened, Kern. Thank you! I esp. like Imola's comments re: respect and research. I come from a journalism background and that's what we did every working day: dive into a topic, a culture, a person and try to learn as much as we could so that we could write intelligently and respectfully about it. It was understood from the get-go that we were "outsiders" trying to understand our subject as thoroughly as possible before we ever typed a single word.
I never thought of journalists in this discussion, Jeanne. But you're so right. It's literally your job to dive into other worlds and come out with something that is not just readable, but fair, thoughtful, insightful, and reflective (or critical) of whatever world you're writing about. Really good note. Thanks for that one.
A tough one but…Hanya Yanagihara wrote “A Little Life,” and she is not a gay man. That novel has been praised by gay authors as a quintessential gay novel. It also won awards.
I think anyone can write about anything, but the question is are you able to write about it so well that those who identify in real life as the subjects will recognize themselves in it truthfully rather than feeling caricatured?
Are you willing to go there in terms of potential criticism that may engulf you? Is the writing so good it can withstand today’s culture war fires and come out the other side as a diamond? 💎
Are you sensitive and detail oriented enough to get so down into the details research wise to understand your characters body, mind, and soul?
If so, yes. Write it!! Your ideas and your voice should be heard. Maybe you have a unique perspective on the subject matter precisely because you are an outsider.
Oh Autumn, I love his paragraph: "I think anyone can write about anything, but the question is are you able to write about it so well that those who identify in real life as the subjects will recognize themselves in it truthfully rather than feeling caricatured?"
Absolutely nailed it!
Thanks, Kern!
You can also structure the novel in a way that acknowledges the lens of it as through the outsider’s perspective. That way, you allow yourself some room to create a narrator that may actually hold flaws in his/her/their understanding of the culture they don’t belong to and a story based off an unreliable narrator.
My personal opinion is that you can write about whatever you want, as long as you do it respectfully and with a lot of research on the aspects of culture you are not familiar with. BUT, I totally hear you, and I know I could get into trouble for saying that. “A privileged white woman (because this is what my skin colour suggests, although my circumstances are indicating something very different) who is culturally appropriating/ repressing the marginalized. My best friend who is Sri- Lankan and gay always teases me and laughs about it. He thinks it’s total bullshit. He can laugh about this, but if I were to do the same, I’d get myself into a whole lot of trouble! I was warned by a friend who works for the CCA that the work I submitted for consideration could be deemed “cultural appropriation” because I chose to write the story from a male perspective, even though men have been writing about women for decades. And, I had a gay character in it (inspired by my best friend who happens to be gay) and I was straight.
So, in short, I hope that things will change in our culture because this is a very boring and limiting environment to be creative in. I think there are so many great stories to be explored and as long as we do this with reverence and curiosity it should be a positive thing. Our identities, cultures, gender etc should not matter. What matters is the story/ work of art. Stories bring us together!
Thank you for asking these question Kern!
I can't believe someone questioned you for writing from the male perspective. The audacity is wild. And I think your first point should go without say (though I know it still needs to be said) and is relevant for all writing. If you aren't familiar with an aspect of your story, whatever that aspect is, do your research and handle it respectfully.
I understand where this sensitivity comes from though. The arrogance of some white writers in the past writing about “the savages” they colonised… but now we seem to be in another extreme where we are cued to box ourselves into an “identity” which is one thing, and not a complex of many things, and stay in that identity box when we write. I reject this idea. We are far more interesting than that!! And you know what amazes me every time?? How much I seem to have in common with my black/ Indian/ Sri Lankan / Jewish friends when we share our stories. At the end of the day, we are just human beings! We love, we hurt, we strive… our plights are so recognisable.
Couldn't have expressed this better myself.
Some relevant thoughts from Nelson George, who is actually on Substack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ9gXsJTTYI
Nice! I'll check the link. I'm also listening to a book of essays by Pullman and in the very first essay, he says if a culture is not engaging in exchange, it becomes dormant, then stale, then rotten (not exactly quote).
My two cents: there is not such thing as a pure culture. Every culture is ultimately the product of centuries and centuries of cultural encounter and exchange. The question of whether any given cultural practice, etc. belongs to any one culture is often a very complex question. For an obvious example, anime originated in what one might call cultural appropriation, from Japanese animators taking inspiration from Disney cartoons. Would anyone argue against anime being an authentic part of Japanese culture?
Oh what an interesting point. I need to think through (sit with) what I feel about culture essentially not belonging to any one group, but my immediate reaction is fascination. I also didn't know about Disney amd anime.
https://www.tcj.com/tezuka-osamu-and-american-comics/
In the words of Tezuka Osamu, the "father of manga" and creator of Astro Boy, "I liked Disney, I adored Disney, here before you is a man whose life was determined by Disney."
One can certainly find other examples. So much of what we think of as Japanese culture is originally Chinese: one of their writing systems, many words (including words everyone knows like kawaii, to the point that a Chinese relative of mine can read quite a bit of Japanese without having to learn the language), tea and the tea ceremony, rice cultivation, Zen Buddhism, etc. And then originally American aspects like anime/manga, with origins in American comics and animation, and baseball. You could make similar lists for any culture, probably. Certainly for the United States.
The language we're communicating in right now has French words, Italian words, Latin words, Greek words, Arabic words, Tagalog words, Farsi words, Hindi words, etc. A single English sentence can be in some sense doubly or triply or quadruply multicultural.
Interesting coincidence, as I was just having a conversation with myself on this topic yesterday, while I was out taking a walk. I have somewhat strong opinions about cultural appropriation, so please understand they are my opinions alone, and I know this is a sensitive topic for some.
I believe there are few concepts more antithetical to authors and writing than cultural appropriation. By the very nature of what we do—create characters and worlds—we cannot possibly produce creative works by limiting ourselves only to our own very specific identities and lived experiences. If that were the case, then an white man from Ohio could write a book ONLY about life in Ohio with ONLY white male characters, and so on.
I don't deny the existence nor the destructive nature of cultural appropriation. But I define it much more narrowly than some. I consider it to be appropriation with actual intention for exploitation (or reckless disregard of it)—for example, making no sincere attempts to achieve authenticity through research, meeting and talking to people from the culture in question, and the engagement of sensitivity readers where appropriate.
If an author is doing their best to present authentic characters and stories by way of the aforementioned steps, then I don't consider that to be cultural appropriation in any way. Labeling authors as appropriators when they are taking such steps will have a massive chilling effect on creativity.
It does feel antithetical to being a writer, doesn't it? Like you're telling us to not imagine outside of the lines. How does that make sense? But to your point, and someone else's in these comments, there has been some foul play in the past that makes appropriation more sensitive. Your point about intent is also well stated.
By way of example, see the controversy surrounding the novel "American Dirt" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dirt#Reception), which I consider a cautionary tale.
This was a riveting, excellent novel, but the author was accused of cultural appropriation simply because she was a white woman with no connection to Mexico. "But it matters in this case that the source is a European-born woman in the U.S. without ties to the Mexican migrant experience."
I was thinking of this example when writing this post, but decided not to use it. You are right to say that this is a cautionary tale.
I haven’t read the book yet, but I’ve wondered how insensitive it was (or if it was insensitive). If it wasn’t, then how much of the uproar was really more about jealousy that this particular book was being highly praised and lauded and was likely to be a bestseller? There’s some historical issues and economic issues involved with this, but we also do work in highly competitive markets and industries. Jealousy can and does happen. People do try to unfairly sabotage others.